|
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
 Posted - 31/03/2007 : 1:37:24 PM
|
The attack of Samskrutha on other Indian languages is surely not a latest development, and it has happened a way long back (pre-historic era). So nobody knows what was the “then” situation. Actually the discrimination between “Pure Kannada Words” and “Samskrutha-influenced Kannada Words” has no substantial yardstick. How to discriminate? The only way to discriminate is: “All the Kannada Words which are not available in any other Indian Language including Samskrutha, are the ‘original’ Kannada words” Is it? And should we feel all those “Kannada Words” that are also available in “Samskrutha” are from “Samskrutha” only? Did we borrow it?
Apart from “Samskrutha”, there are other set of words which are almost common in both “Kannada” & “Tamil”. Now, should we remove all those words? No. We may presume that has come from same proto-language. So why can’t we think in the same line when it comes to so-called “Samskrutha” words? If we try to remove “so-called Samskrutha” words from Kannada, won't “Kannada” get depleted? How can we find alternate “Pure Kannada” words for all those? There is no significant historical evidence for proving that “Kannada” was once-upon-a-time had so-called “Pure Kannada Words”. All the great poets & authors have abundantly used so-called “Samskrutha” words. If we want to remove all “Samskrutha” words, then we may have to change our Gods also. All the Hindu-Gods have meaning from so-called “Samskrutha”. And most of Keerthanas & prayers are in Samskrutha. Classical music has lot of Samskrutha influence.
Why the hatred for “Samskrutha”? There is a wonderful example of “English” which is after all a language formed on the basis of collecting words & techniques from all other languages. Now, will the English-speaking people feel false-pride about their language? The problem with influence & attack from the language is: not the problem of the “language”; but it is the problem of the language-speaking people. When I call attack from Hindi, Tamil, English, etc, is killing “Kannada”, I’m not hating those languages. It is more to do with “What damage that attack/influence can cause to Kannada”. If we see a lot of Hindi/Tamil/English words in Kannada, then it will result in bootlicking those language-people. They will feel that we are their slaves! That’s my concern! But if we are going to bring some words from other languages into Kannada and if that it is going to enrich our language, then I have no problems. In fact, I have no problems whatsoever when it comes to bringing “nouns” from other languages into Kannada. Also no problems in bringing “verbs” and apply our own grammar into it. “Grammar” is different from “Vocabulary”. If Kannada’s vocabulary is going to increase with the inclusion of other language words, then why not? But that should happen naturally and only if it is required. For e.g., can we use “Ganaka Yanthra” as a replacement for “Computer” effectively? How many can feel comfortable about it? Probably there can be a pure Kannada Word for “Computer” and “Ganaka Yanthra” could be a Sanskrit word. Forget it. But at least we can use our own Grammar into it. “Computer annu”, “Computer indha”, etc. Doesn’t that sound natural? So why hesitate? But yes, we need to be careful and just not spoil our language by rubbish way of including other language words.
Just see how the English-men have accepted the Urdu/Hindi word “Dhoosra” for some kind of spin-bowling in cricket? They didn’t scratch their head to find out a term in English for that. The Pakistan players had termed it & used it frequently, and others followed it. That’s it.
Just because the Tamil idiots went on a rampage to remove “Samskrutha” words from their language, cannot really make Tamil great. It has only spoiled Tamil. Definitely we Kannadigas should not do that thing now, and kill Kannada further. I don’t think this will help Kannada. There are other problems which we need to worry about. Aryan invasion is a real bullshit. Just like how “Aryan invasion” is used by some crooks to clas[not allowed] Hindus, probably this new thing “Samskrutha-influence” is being used to clas[not allowed] Indian languages and hence our culture again. We should not fall prey to this again. Why can’t we think that there was one common thing (one common culture, one common language, etc) and probably with changes, there were deviations. If we think in that line, then things will be so beautiful that, even we can come to a conclusion that all the so-called religions (Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc) have the same root, all languages (including West, East, Asian & Middle-East) have the same origin, etc. But if we want to discriminate, then we can discriminate among Kannadigas also, because Kannada has some variants as well.
“Samskrutha” today is not the mother tongue of a concrete “group of people”! After all there is no state in India which is reserved for “Sanskrit-speaking” people. So definitely nobody is going to ride on us, if we use “Samskrutha”. But that’s not the case with other Indian languages. If we use other Indian languages, they will ride on us calling us as their slaves. So, from a “physical” point of view at least, “Samskrutha” cannot cause damage to Kannada or its people.
As I mentioned above, surely there is a chance for a Samskrutha-attack on Kannada, but we have very little knowledge about it, as most of the things have happened in the pre-historic era. But the attack of other Indian languages today, is happening in front of our eyes, which we must & should not tolerate. This is at least in our control today.
The problems have to be solved in “stack” order and not in “queue” order. The latest problem must be dealt first, because it is relatively new to us and we are aware of it’s ongoing. So, let us first attack the influence of Hindi in Kannada, which is happening very lately. (Dil, Duniya, Paagal, etc are the latest absurd words which are killing Kannada). Then we will tackle the English-influence. Then we will tackle the Urdu-influence (Kacheri, Sarkaara, etc). Then we will tackle the Samskrutha influence. So before we worry about “Samskrutha”, we need to tackle the other “controllable” things. I have given enough reasons above for why we should give lesser significance to “Samskrutha” attack for now. If we go in “queue” order, and try to worry about “Samskrutha”, then by the time we solve it (which is anyway difficult), the other problems will grow bigger (Hindi would have dominated Kannada) and it would just make matters that much more difficult.
Coming back to whether “Samskrutha” has indeed spoiled “Kannada”. The answer would be “No” & “Yes” also. It’s like Chicken-Egg Puzzle. We can consider “Kannada” as Chicken, and “Samskrutha” as Egg. So, one may argue that “Kannada” is derived from “Samskrutha” (Chicken coming out from Egg). But then, what was the origin for egg? No one knows! So don’t worry. Egg is Egg, Chicken is Chicken. At least, “Chicken” has life and it can move around. Let us feel proud of “Kannada”, as it has grown beyond “Samskrutha” and it at least has 3 to 5 crores of speakers! Let us worry about others, namely, Hindi (Pig), Tamil (Dog), English (Fox), etc, who may harm Kannada. Samskrutha, the egg, has nothing to do with Kannada’s decline. In fact, wherever possible, we can try to utilize Samskrutha if it is going to help us and if it is not going to complicate “Kannada”. Absolutely no harm in that, if you ask me.
On the other hand, we should really concentrate on using easier & so-called pure Kannada words in place of complicated so-called Samskrutha words. And it will only going to help us avoid English as much as possible. That should be the right concern. We will call those words as “complicated” words and we will not worry whether they are from Samskrutha or elsewhere. If they are complicated, then we will remove it. That’s it.
And this change has to happen in three important fields: 1. Education, 2. Media and 3. Administration. First the education system has to teach our kids about simplifying our Kannada. The simpler Kannada has to be taught to our children, and the syllabi should change accordingly. If we add this simplified Kannada idea along with Kannada mother-tongue education, surely it will help our kids get proper & quality education. Then, our media (films, TVs, Press, etc) must try to utilize & adopt this “simplified” Kannada. Then, our administration departments (Govt Papers, Govt Rules, legislation, etc) should try to utilize & adopt this simplified Kannada in all the administrative issues.
So people have to be educated, enlightened & governed. Common man can’t just change his language so easily. It has to happen in a mass way. How many of us tend to speak Proper Kannada (without “inglees” influence)? So, it has to happen in a mass way.
I again stress that, we should feel proud of the grammar & technical aspects of our language and not worry about “Vocabulary”. Presence of Samskrutha or Urdu or English words will not harm us. Only thing is we should use them naturally and those words should get mingled in our language, and those words should be used judicially wherever required.
Special Thanks to Mr. Raghunath & Mr. Appata Kannadiga who were the inspiration behind this thread.
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 31/03/2007 : 1:49:24 PM
|
| In Samskrutha there is no sound called "La". The only languages which utilize the sound "La" are Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Marathi. While Telugu & Marathi have historical evidence of being younger to Kannada, and further "Kannada" & "Tamil" can be considered as derived from same proto language, we now have the reason for why we should not feel inferior to "Samskrutha". Instead of worrying about Samskrutha influence on Kannada, we can also think that Samskrutha might have derived/inspired from Kannada. OR we will leave this as "Egg/Chicken puzzle", and concentrate on other important things. |
 |
|
|
Appatta_Kannadiga
164 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 1:36:19 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
In Samskrutha there is no sound called "La". The only languages which utilize the sound "La" are Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Marathi. While Telugu & Marathi have historical evidence of being younger to Kannada, and further "Kannada" & "Tamil" can be considered as derived from same proto language, we now have the reason for why we should not feel inferior to "Samskrutha". Instead of worrying about Samskrutha influence on Kannada, we can also think that Samskrutha might have derived/inspired from Kannada. OR we will leave this as "Egg/Chicken puzzle", and concentrate on other important things.
HiFi avare, great way to start this thread.Believe me, i have checked the "La" aspect of samskrutha with my dad who has studied samkrutha upto degree plus atleast 3-4 very well learned vidwaamsaru and they were all unanimous in their view that it is very much present but typically northies don't use it as they do not have the same in hindi,etc.I was still not convinced and aksed them for proof and they did quaote a couple of sukthaas( veda da bhaagagaLu)I still was'nt convinced and I did bring this argu with my non-south friend and they too said its not there in samskruth.For me it was a case of "back to square one".As recently as 1 month back I was going thru some comparative study of ancient languages in the internet and that's were I found that Vedic samskrutha had "La" which is still retained by many south Indian languages but with the advent of praakrutha bhaashe in the north the usage of "La" eventually faded away and hence the reason for non-existence.You will agree with me that when it comes to puritanical views on some of our ancient stuff, its the south Indian views that always gains the edge.No wonder that its south India that contributed the Trimathacharyas( Shaankara,Ramaanuja & Madwhwa).Even culturally, we still have retained a lot more than our northy counterparts partly b'cos south was'nt as much ravaged by the invaders as noth was.I rest my case |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 1:40:35 PM
|
No sanskrit does have that sound.
example : DayaLu(But they say this word has gone from kannada to sanskrit itself.)whatever it is sanskrit has that sound 'la'.
|
|
|
|
Appatta_Kannadiga
164 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 1:57:39 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
The attack of Samskrutha on other Indian languages is surely not a latest development, and it has happened a way long back (pre-historic era). So nobody knows what was the “then” situation. Actually the discrimination between “Pure Kannada Words” and “Samskrutha-influenced Kannada Words” has no substantial yardstick. How to discriminate? The only way to discriminate is: “All the Kannada Words which are not available in any other Indian Language including Samskrutha, are the ‘original’ Kannada words” Is it? And should we feel all those “Kannada Words” that are also available in “Samskrutha” are from “Samskrutha” only? Did we borrow it?
Apart from “Samskrutha”, there are other set of words which are almost common in both “Kannada” & “Tamil”. Now, should we remove all those words? No. We may presume that has come from same proto-language. So why can’t we think in the same line when it comes to so-called “Samskrutha” words? If we try to remove “so-called Samskrutha” words from Kannada, won't “Kannada” get depleted? How can we find alternate “Pure Kannada” words for all those? There is no significant historical evidence for proving that “Kannada” was once-upon-a-time had so-called “Pure Kannada Words”. All the great poets & authors have abundantly used so-called “Samskrutha” words. If we want to remove all “Samskrutha” words, then we may have to change our Gods also. All the Hindu-Gods have meaning from so-called “Samskrutha”. And most of Keerthanas & prayers are in Samskrutha. Classical music has lot of Samskrutha influence.
Why the hatred for “Samskrutha”? There is a wonderful example of “English” which is after all a language formed on the basis of collecting words & techniques from all other languages. Now, will the English-speaking people feel false-pride about their language? The problem with influence & attack from the language is: not the problem of the “language”; but it is the problem of the language-speaking people. When I call attack from Hindi, Tamil, English, etc, is killing “Kannada”, I’m not hating those languages. It is more to do with “What damage that attack/influence can cause to Kannada”. If we see a lot of Hindi/Tamil/English words in Kannada, then it will result in bootlicking those language-people. They will feel that we are their slaves! That’s my concern! But if we are going to bring some words from other languages into Kannada and if that it is going to enrich our language, then I have no problems. In fact, I have no problems whatsoever when it comes to bringing “nouns” from other languages into Kannada. Also no problems in bringing “verbs” and apply our own grammar into it. “Grammar” is different from “Vocabulary”. If Kannada’s vocabulary is going to increase with the inclusion of other language words, then why not? But that should happen naturally and only if it is required. For e.g., can we use “Ganaka Yanthra” as a replacement for “Computer” effectively? How many can feel comfortable about it? Probably there can be a pure Kannada Word for “Computer” and “Ganaka Yanthra” could be a Sanskrit word. Forget it. But at least we can use our own Grammar into it. “Computer annu”, “Computer indha”, etc. Doesn’t that sound natural? So why hesitate? But yes, we need to be careful and just not spoil our language by rubbish way of including other language words.
Just see how the English-men have accepted the Urdu/Hindi word “Dhoosra” for some kind of spin-bowling in cricket? They didn’t scratch their head to find out a term in English for that. The Pakistan players had termed it & used it frequently, and others followed it. That’s it.
Just because the Tamil idiots went on a rampage to remove “Samskrutha” words from their language, cannot really make Tamil great. It has only spoiled Tamil. Definitely we Kannadigas should not do that thing now, and kill Kannada further. I don’t think this will help Kannada. There are other problems which we need to worry about. Aryan invasion is a real bullshit. Just like how “Aryan invasion” is used by some crooks to clas[not allowed] Hindus, probably this new thing “Samskrutha-influence” is being used to clas[not allowed] Indian languages and hence our culture again. We should not fall prey to this again. Why can’t we think that there was one common thing (one common culture, one common language, etc) and probably with changes, there were deviations. If we think in that line, then things will be so beautiful that, even we can come to a conclusion that all the so-called religions (Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc) have the same root, all languages (including West, East, Asian & Middle-East) have the same origin, etc. But if we want to discriminate, then we can discriminate among Kannadigas also, because Kannada has some variants as well.
“Samskrutha” today is not the mother tongue of a concrete “group of people”! After all there is no state in India which is reserved for “Sanskrit-speaking” people. So definitely nobody is going to ride on us, if we use “Samskrutha”. But that’s not the case with other Indian languages. If we use other Indian languages, they will ride on us calling us as their slaves. So, from a “physical” point of view at least, “Samskrutha” cannot cause damage to Kannada or its people.
As I mentioned above, surely there is a chance for a Samskrutha-attack on Kannada, but we have very little knowledge about it, as most of the things have happened in the pre-historic era. But the attack of other Indian languages today, is happening in front of our eyes, which we must & should not tolerate. This is at least in our control today.
The problems have to be solved in “stack” order and not in “queue” order. The latest problem must be dealt first, because it is relatively new to us and we are aware of it’s ongoing. So, let us first attack the influence of Hindi in Kannada, which is happening very lately. (Dil, Duniya, Paagal, etc are the latest absurd words which are killing Kannada). Then we will tackle the English-influence. Then we will tackle the Urdu-influence (Kacheri, Sarkaara, etc). Then we will tackle the Samskrutha influence. So before we worry about “Samskrutha”, we need to tackle the other “controllable” things. I have given enough reasons above for why we should give lesser significance to “Samskrutha” attack for now. If we go in “queue” order, and try to worry about “Samskrutha”, then by the time we solve it (which is anyway difficult), the other problems will grow bigger (Hindi would have dominated Kannada) and it would just make matters that much more difficult.
Coming back to whether “Samskrutha” has indeed spoiled “Kannada”. The answer would be “No” & “Yes” also. It’s like Chicken-Egg Puzzle. We can consider “Kannada” as Chicken, and “Samskrutha” as Egg. So, one may argue that “Kannada” is derived from “Samskrutha” (Chicken coming out from Egg). But then, what was the origin for egg? No one knows! So don’t worry. Egg is Egg, Chicken is Chicken. At least, “Chicken” has life and it can move around. Let us feel proud of “Kannada”, as it has grown beyond “Samskrutha” and it at least has 3 to 5 crores of speakers! Let us worry about others, namely, Hindi (Pig), Tamil (Dog), English (Fox), etc, who may harm Kannada. Samskrutha, the egg, has nothing to do with Kannada’s decline. In fact, wherever possible, we can try to utilize Samskrutha if it is going to help us and if it is not going to complicate “Kannada”. Absolutely no harm in that, if you ask me.
On the other hand, we should really concentrate on using easier & so-called pure Kannada words in place of complicated so-called Samskrutha words. And it will only going to help us avoid English as much as possible. That should be the right concern. We will call those words as “complicated” words and we will not worry whether they are from Samskrutha or elsewhere. If they are complicated, then we will remove it. That’s it.
And this change has to happen in three important fields: 1. Education, 2. Media and 3. Administration. First the education system has to teach our kids about simplifying our Kannada. The simpler Kannada has to be taught to our children, and the syllabi should change accordingly. If we add this simplified Kannada idea along with Kannada mother-tongue education, surely it will help our kids get proper & quality education. Then, our media (films, TVs, Press, etc) must try to utilize & adopt this “simplified” Kannada. Then, our administration departments (Govt Papers, Govt Rules, legislation, etc) should try to utilize & adopt this simplified Kannada in all the administrative issues.
So people have to be educated, enlightened & governed. Common man can’t just change his language so easily. It has to happen in a mass way. How many of us tend to speak Proper Kannada (without “inglees” influence)? So, it has to happen in a mass way.
I again stress that, we should feel proud of the grammar & technical aspects of our language and not worry about “Vocabulary”. Presence of Samskrutha or Urdu or English words will not harm us. Only thing is we should use them naturally and those words should get mingled in our language, and those words should be used judicially wherever required.
Special Thanks to Mr. Raghunath & Mr. Appata Kannadiga who were the inspiration behind this thread.
Great post HiFi avare.I think you have rightly emphasised that the Grammar/construct of a language is very important while not ruling out the importance of vocabulary.I'm sure every language in the world today barring English is facing this problem in vocabulary because more and more research & invention is happening in English( with some exception of may be Geman,French and that too to a lesser extent) and if one observes carefully its been only Samskrutha to some extent,which has been able to withstand this invasion of new words.If more inventions /discoveries/research in scinec/tech ,etc happens in Kannada and if we coin new words, then I'm sure the world will accept it.So when we are talking about onslaught of other languages, we are also possibly talking of onslaught in cultural terms which could mean the way we speak,eat,dress,dance, etc.In other words how far removed are very from our"Mannu" is the essence. namma shatkoti Kannadigaru kealvu parabhaashe padagaLanna oppikondu baLasidre adu namma vyaakaraNa da anuguNa vaagiye iruthe.aaga adu namma bhaasheye aagibiduthe aadara HiFi avaru heLidha haage naavu adannu jathanadinda niyanthrisabeku |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 2:46:27 PM
|
AK,
excellent,I will start using the word duniya.Because usage of word duniya does not affect our grammar in any way.Its far more easier than prapancha which our villagers can't even prononce properly.
Hifi does not think inclusion of sanskrit words are no problem
yograjbhat does not think inclusion of hindi words are not a problem
Then hiFi has no right to say about bootlicking attitude of yograjbhat just because he prefers hindi over sanskrit,am i right/
|
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:08:22 PM
|
Ha ha ha!!! Duniya will be pronounced properly by our villagers!?!?! Usage of Sanskrit words in Kannada was/is a spontaneous process, and yes if I were a superhuman (If I had lived in all stages of human civilization), then I would have avoided influx of Sanskrit words the moment it happened. But influx of Hindi words is a latest development which can and must be avoided. And I have every right to blast the crappy Yogaraj when he does that. He is no scholar or linguist to presume that some Hindi words can be borrowed into Kannada. As I told, "Media" has the right to only propogandize or publicize the inputs taken from "Education". They have no rights to play the role of "Education" group. And "Administration" has the right to only bring in rules for whatever proposed by "Education" group and propogandized by "Media" group. It is something like the roles of trinity gods (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva). Each have a unique & significant role, but they should not clash & share their roles. These points of mine, I think didn't draw your attention!
BTW, even you & me belong to this "media" group, as we are trying to propogandize whatever we feel right to others around us here. And others also have right to criticize us.
BTW, try operating Vibhakthi prathyaya to "Duniya". We will see...
Duniyaadha...
Duniyaavannu...
Duniyaadhindha...
Duniyaavu... (terrible)
etc
Alternatively, take Sanskrit's "Prakruthi".
Prakruthiya...
Prakruthiyindha...
Prakruthiyu... (Sweet)
So it clearly indicates that "Duniya" can't be included to Kannada. Just because that some rogues like Yogaraj want to bootlick Hindiwalas, doesn't mean that rest of Kannadigas have to kiss Yogaraj's butts! |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:12:37 PM
|
Even English's "Car" can be borrowed to Kannada successfully...
Car'ina...
Car'indha...
Car'u (natural) |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:19:28 PM
|
Hifi i can give other examples where hindi is far more suitable
Take khaali (empty)
now try its alternative in sanskrit.
And you did not take proper alternative of duniya i.e prampancha
both looks ugly and bad. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:25:52 PM
|
Yes. Prapancha is bit shaky. Prapanchavu sounds bit awkward, but it's OK. But "Jagatthu" is brilliant! (Intrinsic Shashti! Terrific! I wonder whether it is a Sanskrit-borrowed word OR Kannada's own word! It is that much natural to Kannada) I think it is better than "prapancha", "vishwa" and also English's "World".
BTW, "Jagave ondhu ranaranga..." is my favorite song! Jagatthu can be shortened to "Jaga" also. So, if "Prapancha" is complicated, then you have alternatives.
BTW, what's wrong if our Villagers can pronounce "Prapancha" as "Parpancha"... I think this was your comment! After all "Scripturial" and "Spoken" cannot be the same and we can always modify accordingly. Look at it English's spoken & written variations "Want to be" to becomes "Wanna be" |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:28:34 PM
|
Khaali is good! It can be borrowed to Kannada! And I think it is already being borrowed! (long back) So, it doesn't fall to "Bootlicking" category.
BTW don't give credit to "Hindi" for this. Khaali's origin comes somewhere from Arbian/Persian which got modified in so-called Hindi. Hindi is a third-rated language which is not sure of it's origin and development. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:30:32 PM
|
| What's wrong with "baridhu" (so-called pure Kannada). I think it can be good alternative for khaali. Anyway, both are good. |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 3:43:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Khaali is good! It can be borrowed to Kannada! And I think it is already being borrowed! (long back) So, it doesn't fall to "Bootlicking" category.
BTW don't give credit to "Hindi" for this. Khaali's origin comes somewhere from Arbian/Persian which got modified in so-called Hindi. Hindi is a third-rated language which is not sure of it's origin and development.
No language is sure of its development and origin.As a matter of fact 99% of kannadigas are not aware of kannada's origin,even linguist are doubtfull about kannada's origin.
A language greatness is not measured by its origins,but how smooth or how fluent it is.
hindi is nothing but mixture of urdu/sanskrit and a group pf languages of north India(bhojpuri,maithili).
BTW,duniya is also persian word.
And also you seem to think that once crept words can't be eradicated.It can be done.In common man language sanskrit words(non kannadised) do not appear too offently,they are hardly used by few linguist,poets and scholars.
See how tamilians reversed the process(No,I am not asking to imitate tamilians,but they have done this very successfully).
Just compare the number of english words they use and number of words we use.
Atleast to what i have observed tamil is spoken in its pure form (% comparisons)than kannada by kannadigas.
you can say that you are least intrested about them,but that is truth.
Sanskrit has made kannada far more complex and killing it inch by inch.Every sanskrit word is getting replaced by english words and you still say that it is not a harm for us?I have given sufficient examples to show you how sanskrit words are being easily replaced by other language words,but the problem is we are not ready to consider sanskrit as another language.
I still reiterate,
blind love for sanskrit is the most dangerous thing for kannada.
Every attempt to replace kannada word will ultimatly end up in that word being replaced by English.
Examples
naDate - varthane - behaviour
maneyavaru - kuTumba - family
heNgasaRU - maHiLe - ladies
I can give 100's of more examples.But i think it will all be in vain. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 4:25:22 PM
|
That's what I have been telling you! Don't try to highlight the origin or span of a language. You always get irked about that "offshoot" issue. Yes, when it required a good technical & tactical "advancement", then some set of scholars might have deviated and brought Kannada to what it is today! You should agree that at some point of time "Sanskrit", "Tamil", "Kannada" all were a single language. Kannada made good advancements. Don't think that there were 3000+ languages in the beginning of world and there are same 3000+ languages today also.
So, my bad criticization on Hindi is based on the same thing. It is sluggish, illogical & poorly organized language (at least whatever I know about it). It is "you" who emphasize on "origin" issue. I'm least bothered about "origin"! I never even mind if people tell that "Kannada" is younger than "Hindi"!!! (Bullshit though) My point is about the greatness of Kannada. |
|
|
|
Appatta_Kannadiga
164 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 4:47:51 PM
|
Raghu,
I think sometimes you take things personally.Let me assure you that we all here( atleast HiFi & Me) are sincerely concerned about everything that is to do with Kannada & Kannadathana.There can be no denying the fact, as you rightly put it ,that the usage of Samskrutha when kannada words are avilable is (in my view) a crime aginst our language.Lets try to publish some of the words and correct ourselves.I think the concept of thathsama & thadhbava was a wonderful which has helped localise quite a few Samkrutha words for ex: Bhakthi as Bhakuthi, etc.Also I hav observed that there are a few samskrutha words ( or i think so) used only by kannadigas but not but by the other languages like telugu,etc which have other samskruth words.Now i'm not sure whether that is also some kind of a localisation phenomenon specific to a language.Pls enlighten.
I think this one is turning out to be an interesting debate but we need to ensure we keep out personalised posts. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:25:52 PM
|
Raghunath,
Did I tell that the topic you raised is bad one? I have actually appreciated you for this concern. But you are failing to observe others' opinion and trying to prove your own biased points.
Do you think "Kannada" is being spoken badly by Kannadigas because of "Sanskrit" words? Come on, "Sanskrit" is considered as one-perfectly technical & logical language by more number of scholars (not me). But I do understand that when "Sanskrit" is brought to Kannada, just like that (illogically), it won't look good. But I can hardly see such illogical things happening with Sanskrit. Most of the words borrowed from Sanskrit to Kannada have perfectly fitted in.
Yes, I agree with you that "Kannadigas" don't speak their language properly, and they invariably use inglees. But don't blame "Sanskrit" completely for this. It has also to do with "bootlicking" & "false-pride" about inglees. It just became a habit. Even though some of us want to avoid inglees, it has become the habit and don't blame Sanskrit for this.
FYI, Hindi has more percentage of Sanskrit than in Kannada! Also it is such a third-class chow-chow language with illogical & meaningless inclusion of alien words (so uncontrollable they are!) But still, I can tell that their speakers speak their language better than Kannadigas & even Tamilians (FYI) with minimum usage of inglees! Yes, you will be surprized to know this! And I really appreciate them for this fact. How can they do it? (If at all "Sanskrit" words are considered as complicated!) And their "scripturial" language is miles different from what they "speak"! And they also have lot of variants in spoken language also! Still they are so good in "communication"!
And don't tell that "Tamilians" were great in what they did! (Chopping "Sanskrit" words!) They were fanatics first of all, and then they were badly attacked by British (in particular) and Mughals. When they lost their religion (Hinduism) so badly, how can you tell that they developed their language in a better way! If they have gotten the classical status today and if they are strong today, it is because of their fanaticism and also because that they are strong in "Administrative" issues, and not that thier "language" is strong!
FYI, Tamilians branched out to another language called "Malayalam" and we can say that "Malayalam" has more Sanskrit than "Tamil" or "Kannada". Why do you think that happened? It was because that few bunch of people were not happy at Sanskrit words being chopped from Tamil, and hence they went back to old form and reformed it! So there is a problem there! Don't think that "Tamil" is great! They lost it's speakers in a lumpsum, because of the weakness in "language"! That is costly!
And yes, "Kannada" also lost it's speakers to "Telugu" (because of administrative issues! Remember Krishna Deva Raya & Vijaynagar era! It was some kind of administrative jinx, and somehow Telugu got more favors at that time!) and also Kannada lost it's speakers to "Marathi" (Because of the bootlicking attitude of Kannada towards North Indians! Although, I'm not sure, "Marathi" is some kind of a cross-bread of North & Dravidian types. At least, 25% of Marathis are lost-Kannadigas!). So don't think that "Kannada" lost it's speakers because of the shortcoming in the language! It is because of other issues.
I think you are hit with a bad agenda (just similar to Aryan Invasion theory) that "Sanskrit" has killed/killing Kannada and other Indian languages. Why bring "Sanskrit" when you are attacking inglees? Why give Sanskrit excuse? If you can't speak fluent Kannada, then it's your problem. You have best example in "Rajkumar" who spoke Kannada fluently (of course containing a lot of Sanskrit words, but no Hindi or exaggerated inglees).
And also I think our villagers still speak fluent Kannada (and that also contains a lot of Sanskrit!) They don't use inglees. Even in cities, please don't think everyone are bad in speaking Kannada! Yes, I agree that there are a large number of Kannadigas who are weak in spoken Kannada.
FYI, Sanskrit is not the property of any one community (as you mentioned "Brahmins"!) Don't mix caste with language! I think you are trying to mix up Aryan theory to this Sanskrit theory! Now I can tell that both are crap (Indirect way of brainwashing techniques by British, which people like you have fallen prey for this!) Even low caste people perform "Dramas" brilliantly utilizing "Sanskrit" shlokas & keerthanas to good effect! "Kshathriyas" (third-type caste) were taught in Sanskrit only (according to Puranas)
Sanskrit is naturally mingled with Indian languages. And I can even tell that all Indian languages (including Dravidian) are inspired by Sanskrit! Even in the book you suggested, at no place the author has tried to degrade or hate Sanskrit. He has only tried to tell that "Kannada Grammar" has to studied separately, and Sanskrit rules don't directly apply to Kannada. He has also went on to tell that "Sanskrit" is like "Temple" and "Kannada" is like "Home". That is a beautiful illustration from him! So, we should always know that "Kannada" is our home and we need to stay there, but "Sanskrit" is like temple and visiting it occasionally is for our benefit only and it won't spoil us! But we can't stay in Temple completely. We need "Home". So I don't know from where you developed this hatred for Sanskrit!
Sanskrit is so much embedded into Indian languages, and it will be really difficult to remove it completely. Even if you remove it completely, on what basis will you tell that your language will be totally free from "Sanskrit"? First of all where is an alternate pure Kannada word for "Shaasthreeya", if at all you want to claim "Classical Status" for Kannada?
Just don't look at Tamils. Also don't give value to that "Classical Status". If somebody is going to get it, leave it. Don't try to be a fool by imitating Tamils in chopping "Sanskrit" words now! Even though it is possible, do you think this is the era of scholars? How many talented people are entering into literature field? My call is, leave "Kannada" language to whatever it is today, but try to develop it in that direction and try to utilize it in our daily life! That's all. Major modifications in language, might kill it.
On the other hand, I have concerns on few things. Much before you, I was chatting with few of my friends (5-6 years back) about why should we use non-frequent words like "Dhantha" (instead of "hallu"), "Snaayu" (instead of "Maamsa"), etc, in Hospitals. Likewise, I'm sure there are plenty of other areas, where so-called Sanskrit words are used instead of simpler so-called pure Kannada words. If this is your concern, then I support you. But at the same time, I got responses from others that, "Scripturial" and "Spoken" languages have to be different, and there is always a kind of dignity maintained in "scripturial" language! Even English people use Latin/Greek for technical words. It is not because they think that latin/greek are superior to English. Just that they want to utilize those dead languages as some kind of coding-words, so that the "spoken" language remains fluent and "scripturial" and "technical" study can be done with a touch of dignity. But, we Indians (especially South-Indians) are not doing the same to Sanskrit. Blindly following Tamils? It is stupidity!
So I can once again tell that "Sanskrit" is not harmful to Kannada, and if otherwise, it has only strengthened Kannada.
The need of the hour is: use simpler Kannada wherever possible (avoid the so-called complicated Sanskrit words, if you feel they are difficult). And whatever you suggested (alternate simpler Kannada words) are indeed a good collection. All concern bodies (Education, Media & Administration) must follow this. The simpler Kannada can be practiced by every Kannadiga and the difference can be checked. But in my opinion "scripturial" Kannada must contain Sanskrit to retain it's vastness. Don't give the excuse of "Sanskrit" for usage of inglees! I think this is the indirect ploy by Englishmen! Killing Sanskrit (it is dead already) might kill other Indian languages also!
Your proposed "Akshara Maale" and your opinions about "Maha Praana" are debatable. But I feel this is not the time to do such drastic changes, as I said this is not the literature era. How can you effectively bring in such changes everywhere? (What about the people who have got used to it!) Yes, you can try using simpler Kannada words, which don't require Maha praanas. That's enough. Don't try to remove Maha Praanas. It will affect us in long term. Remember that even Maha Praana letters in Kannada have our own script! And it fits nicely into our language (Just see how we write "Kha" in Kannada! It is different from "ka") So it is not something that has been blindly imitated or borrowed from Sanskrit!
I think "Tamil" is already feeling the pinch of "losing" some of it's letters and so-called Sanskrit words! In Tamil, ka & ga sounds are same! This has really hit them badly while decoding or even speaking other languages! But they don't try to show their weaknesses to others, and they back their language always! But we Kannadigas want to shout at every small thing that is wrong in us!
Kannada's "Bittu bidu" becomes "vuttudu" in Tamil! This is how they have simplified their language! Now you can tell Tamil is greater than Kannada! Because "Bittu bidu" has four letters (two words) and "Vuttudu" has three letters (single word!) Is it? Now you can get the clue from this one simple example that "Tamil" might have been derived from "Kannada" only! According to some scientific analogy, you may conclude that a word like "Bittu bidu" can transfer into "vuttudu" (through constant speaking for generations and also simplification process)
So whatever outsiders yell about India's history, is bullshit, and they are always biased about "Caste System" and "Sanskrit", and they want to use it as a weapon to discriminate and thus dismantle Indians. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:33:23 PM
|
| Also in your suggested book, the author has opinioned that "Samskrutha" words have got a special position in Kannada while borrowing, and then fit nicely to Kannada than the words that are brought from other languages! |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:37:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Raghunath,
FYI, Tamilians branched out to another language called "Malayalam" and we can say that "Malayalam" has more Sanskrit than "Tamil" or "Kannada". Why do you think that happened? It was because that few bunch of people were not happy at Sanskrit words being chopped from Tamil, and hence they went back to old form and reformed it! So there is a problem there! Don't think that "Tamil" is great! They lost it's speakers in a lumpsum, because of the weakness in "language"! That is costly!
No,your understanding is wrong. Tamil branched into malayalam because of sanskrit's influence in it.
Nambhoodari brahmins who were brought from north india refused to speak tamil.With the pressure the local language with the influence of sanskrit branched into a different language.
|
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:43:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Raghunath,
Kannada's "Bittu bidu" becomes "vuttudu" in Tamil! This is how they have simplified their language! Now you can tell Tamil is greater than Kannada! Because "Bittu bidu" has four letters (two words) and "Vuttudu" has three letters (single word!) Is it? Now you can get the clue from this one simple example that "Tamil" might have been derived from "Kannada" only! According to some scientific analogy, you may conclude that a word like "Bittu bidu" can transfer into "vuttudu" (through constant speaking for generations and also simplification process)
vuttudu is a ntaive tamil word.kannada words unwent change from v->b in late 10th century.It would be wrong to say that they have simplified like this. |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:47:37 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Raghunath,
So whatever outsiders yell about India's history, is bullshit, and they are always biased about "Caste System" and "Sanskrit", and they want to use it as a weapon to discriminate and thus dismantle Indians.
What ever insiders tell is also not truth.No i don't believe in aryan invasion theory,but the language family theory is a very much proved.Its proved fact that sanskrit and kannada belongs to a complete different language families. |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:50:25 PM
|
Yes, any such drastic changeover will have lot of reasons, and we can't just comprehend so easily. And I agree this in case of "Malayam". But why do you always think about caste issues? Do people always have concern on caste and nothing about languages? Just "caste" differences can't bring about an origin of a language! There must have been something wrong in the language (Tamil) also, for it to branch out, and not just caste! Who filled so much caste into your head?
I think your this kind of soft-corner towards Tamil may again irk Mr. JB007 to attack you ;-) |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 5:54:32 PM
|
| But every two families will have a one common family at some stage! Branching out is for benefit only! Just like Animal Kingdom wants to keep reproducing and creating families, same thing applies to language also! Yes, there is significant difference in Sanskrit & Dravidian languages. But there are also similarities (which you can understand, if you analyze from opposite direction) |
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:03:44 PM
|
Now, you are in a dilemma! You are telling that changing v -> b is a latest phenomenon! This will only substantiate that "Tamil" is older than "Kannada" (Because they have more v's than b's AND more p's than h's)
Also I think the sound "ba" is more proficient than the sound "va". Even just-born babies would prefer "ba" to "va". Apply general science! Science is independent of language! So in case of "bittu bidu", I can surely tell that "bittu bidu" can be changed into "vuttudu" rather than vice versa. I just took this case, because there is similarity in sounds and also in meaning. But if you feel they are separate words in these two languages, then I oblige. But then, are you sure?
I think changeover from v -> b and p -> h cannot be a conclusive evidence for language-growth. It could just be momentary adustments! Who knows, at some other point of time, there would have been reverse changes (b -> v and h-> p) |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:04:29 PM
|
On the other hand, I have concerns on few things. Much before you, I was chatting with few of my friends (5-6 years back) about why should we use non-frequent words like "Dhantha" (instead of "hallu"), "Snaayu" (instead of "Maamsa"), etc, in Hospitals. Likewise, I'm sure there are plenty of other areas, where so-called Sanskrit words are used instead of simpler so-called pure Kannada words. If this is your concern, then I support you. But at the same time, I got responses from others that, "Scripturial" and "Spoken" languages have to be different, and there is always a kind of dignity maintained in "scripturial" language! Even English people use Latin/Greek for technical words. It is not because they think that latin/greek are superior to English. Just that they want to utilize those dead languages as some kind of coding-words, so that the "spoken" language remains fluent and "scripturial" and "technical" study can be done with a touch of dignity. But, we Indians (especially South-Indians) are not doing the same to Sanskrit. Blindly following Tamils? It is stupidity!
It is a false assumption that diglossia in a language is good.
|
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:07:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Now, you are in a dilemma! You are telling that changing v -> b is a latest phenomenon! This will only substantiate that "Tamil" is older than "Kannada" (Because they have more v's than b's AND more p's than h's)
Also I think the sound "ba" is more proficient than the sound "va". Even just-born babies would prefer "ba" to "va". Apply general science! Science is independent of language! So in case of "bittu bidu", I can surely tell that "bittu bidu" can be changed into "vuttudu" rather than vice versa. I just took this case, becasue there is similarity in sounds and also in meaning. But if you feel they are separate words in these two languages, then I oblige. But then, are you sure?
No i dont think so. in kannada previously it was vuttudu only,but may be around 10th century it has transformed into "ba".It has absolutly no reason to undermine the oldness of kannada. |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:09:52 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Now, you are in a dilemma! You are telling that changing v -> b is a latest phenomenon! This will only substantiate that "Tamil" is older than "Kannada" (Because they have more v's than b's AND more p's than h's)
Also I think the sound "ba" is more proficient than the sound "va". Even just-born babies would prefer "ba" to "va". Apply general science! Science is independent of language! So in case of "bittu bidu", I can surely tell that "bittu bidu" can be changed into "vuttudu" rather than vice versa. I just took this case, because there is similarity in sounds and also in meaning. But if you feel they are separate words in these two languages, then I oblige. But then, are you sure?
I think changeover from v -> b and p -> h cannot be a conclusive evidence for language-growth. It could just be momentary adustments! Who knows, at some other point of time, there would have been reverse changes (b -> v and h-> p)
you are trying to guess to much.As i said earlier our language has transformed at various stages and its a natural phenomenon.
and what do you mean by conclusive evidence?I did not get it? Just read nrupatunga's kaviraja marga and read a newspaper today?
observe the difference.Language changes are common in every language. |
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:18:30 PM
|
The need of the hour is: use simpler Kannada wherever possible (avoid the so-called complicated Sanskrit words, if you feel they are difficult). And whatever you suggested (alternate simpler Kannada words) are indeed a good collection. All concern bodies (Education, Media & Administration) must follow this. The simpler Kannada can be practiced by every Kannadiga and the difference can be checked. But in my opinion "scripturial" Kannada must contain Sanskrit to retain it's vastness. Don't give the excuse of "Sanskrit" for usage of inglees! I think this is the indirect ploy by Englishmen! Killing Sanskrit (it is dead already) might kill other Indian languages also!
But in my opinion "scripturial" Kannada must contain Sanskrit to retain it's vastness. - it does not happen so,few people try to master that and they introduce it has a virus in the society which will lead to the death of simpler spoken words.
And regarding the soft corner towards tamil,i don't have any.my concern is only about kannada and not to save any sanskrit or so.
|
|
|
|
HiFi
1911 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:18:34 PM
|
Oh! Then can you make everything common? Just an e.g., Please tell me which word will you use for male & female genetals in Kannada (a common word for both "scripturial" and "spoken". Please suggest so-called pure Kannada Word, and no so-called Sanskrit words please!) Yes, we can't remove words for male & female genetals from any language, thinking that they are "private" things and "indecent" things. So please suggest something common. And how much confident will you be, about effectively using it in both "scripturial" and "spoken" versions. Don't compromise to either "spoken" or "scripturial". Try to give justice to both.
No shy or no indecency. Please suggest. This is serious.
That's why I tell, there has to be variety. Variety in vocabulory. And if it can't be achieved from the same language, then there is absolutely nothing wrong in borrowing from other languages. And it is better if we bring it from dead & unused (at the moment) languages, because it will act some kind of dampening or decoding effect on users. That's what even English people have done, by using latin/greek to good effect.
Let us accept that no language is perfect or adequate. What's wrong in sharing? (But share in a proper way) Even Sanskrit is not totally great! Otherwise it would have had at least a handful of speakers by now! But it doesn't have it! That means, it also has some weaknesses (maybe "complexity" as we are discussing). But at least we will utilize it wherever needed & wherever possible.
And how can you tell that "scripturial" & "spoken" language have to be same??? Which language on earth has this? Maybe Tamil is close in this issue (But that can't make Tamil great). Speaking is different from writing/reading. Please accept it. Spoken language can't be written/read properly on to / from books. And Written language can't be spoken properly. Understand the difference.
Spoken language will have lot of "otthaaksharas" and it will be very difficult if the same thing is used for "scripts". Whereas, "written" language will have lot of separations which becomes difficult to speak fluently. But they have to be that way, for the convenience of both.
Just try writing one page of "spoken kannada language" (pure "spoken kannada")
And then try speaking "written kannada language" for at least 5 minutes.
You will understand the difficulty! That's not possible! There has to be difference!
|
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:26:55 PM
|
Oh! Then can you make everything common? Just an e.g., Please tell me which word will you use for male & female genetals in Kannada (a common word for both "scripturial" and "spoken". Please suggest so-called pure Kannada Word, and no so-called Sanskrit words please!) Yes, we can't remove words for male & female genetals from any language, thinking that they are "private" things and "indecent" things. So please suggest something common. And how much confident will you be, about effectively using it in both "scripturial" and "spoken" versions. Don't compromise to either "spoken" or "scripturial". Try to give justice to both.
Does english langauge requires any alternative word to describe those things?you use them so easily ?
secondly variety in vocabulary does not mean fetch or use complex words of other language.Our bootlicking attitude towards sanskrit is so high that today there is virtually no kannada words for 1000's of words.This all arised due to feeling that sanskrit is superior to our language.
Instead of developing our language our scholars were busy bootlicking sanskrit.Ex - tell me one great kannada epic which is not a translation of sanskrit literary work?
for every new word we go and search for sanskrit and bring a complex word from there.This kind of bootlicking attitude has been there in us from 100's of years.
|
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:30:57 PM
|
Diglossia means the usage of completly different words not the way.Let me give you one example.
ಸಕ್ಕದ - ಅವನು ಅವಳ ಹತ್ತಿರ ತುಂಬಾ ಅನುಚಿತವಾಗಿ ವರ್ತಿಸಿದನು.
ಕನ್ನಡ - ಅವನು ಅವಳ ಬಳಿ ತುಂಬಾ ಕೆಟ್ಟದಾಗಿ ನಡೆದುಕೊಂಡನು.
|
|
|
|
raghunath
India
2168 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 6:39:28 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HiFi
Oh!
And how can you tell that "scripturial" & "spoken" language have to be same??? Which language on earth has this? Maybe Tamil is close in this issue (But that can't make Tamil great). Speaking is different from writing/reading. Please accept it. Spoken language can't be written/read properly on to / from books. And Written language can't be spoken properly. Understand the difference.
Have you observed a small thing,you would have said the same in english even while speaking - english is also one of the language with least diglossia. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Is Samskrutha harmful to Kannada???