This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
South Dravidian languages article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why Should the river dispute be discussed on this page? Chirags 05:48, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Ganapti: I do not understand why you have wholesale reverted my edits which were adding clarity to the article. The article was labeled as citing no authority and I have added a good deal of relevant citations from Dravidian linguistics. Please restritc your edits to specific statements. Thank you.
Periannan Chandrasekaran 14:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Gnapti: Thanks for trying to edit specific portions. No coming to the Scripts section, if you wish to give importance to other scholars it is gladly welcome and you please simply add their statements too here to give multiple learned opinions on the subject. But you please do not erase all scholarly citations so as to simply let only your unsupported opinion remain. So again if you have other supporting *scholarly* claims please add them here. Moreover if you think there is another place which is serving as the main place for Telugu script origin, then please do not have anything on it here at all especially it is not a published scholarly claim. So either you remove yours completely or let other statements be here or let us simply make the section point to Telugu Script article. I will do that right now. As any way scripts are very irrelevant and then we will have to talk about the scripts of other members of the Tamil-Kannada branch also: Tamil, Malayalam and so on Periannan Chandrasekaran 18:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved by nominator as an uncontested move. ( non-admin closure) Celia Homeford ( talk) 10:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Tamil–Kannada languages → South Dravidian languages – Larger branches need priority over smaller inner branches, there is a page for Proto-South Dravidian language and Northern Dravidian, there should be a page for the southern branch too. We could move this page and make appropriate changes to accommodate Tuluic. AleksiB 1945 ( talk) 10:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky ( talk) 15:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
@ TrUtHJan: While I appreaciate the fact that you finally start to read one of our sources instead of removing their citations, you should nevertheless read them all and cite them faithfully.
Krishnamurti (2003) classifies South Dravidian (= South Dravidian I) as follows on page 21:
Zvelebil (1990) classifies Tamil-Tulu (= South Dravidian I) as follows on page 56 [1]:
The only difference between their classification is Krishnamurti's inclusion of Koraga (not included by Zvelebil because of lack of data), and Zvelebil's trifurcation of the branch within the Tamil-Kannada languages that is coordinate to Kannada-Banaga, i.e. Tamil-Malayam, Irula, Kodagu, Kota and Toda (Krishnamurti has more complex nesting here).
But both scholars do not have Tamil-Kannada as a primary branch of the Dravidian languages. In both classifications, South Dravidian (in the narrow sense) bifurcates into Tulu and Tamil-Kannada.
@ Roshan Dickwella: Please comment here also (I think we are in agreement about what the sources say) when (or before) making further reverts. We're all getting into the terrain of a slow edit war. For terminological clarity, I will add a citation to Steever's handbook later. IMO, we should strictly follow Steever in using South Dravidian for SDr I and South-Central Dravidian for SDr II. Austronesier ( talk) 07:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
there have been clearly mentions of Tamil-Kannada as alt name for South Dravidian I...Where? Not on page 470 of Krishnamurti's book. – Austronesier ( talk) 16:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
South Dravidian languages article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why Should the river dispute be discussed on this page? Chirags 05:48, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Ganapti: I do not understand why you have wholesale reverted my edits which were adding clarity to the article. The article was labeled as citing no authority and I have added a good deal of relevant citations from Dravidian linguistics. Please restritc your edits to specific statements. Thank you.
Periannan Chandrasekaran 14:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Gnapti: Thanks for trying to edit specific portions. No coming to the Scripts section, if you wish to give importance to other scholars it is gladly welcome and you please simply add their statements too here to give multiple learned opinions on the subject. But you please do not erase all scholarly citations so as to simply let only your unsupported opinion remain. So again if you have other supporting *scholarly* claims please add them here. Moreover if you think there is another place which is serving as the main place for Telugu script origin, then please do not have anything on it here at all especially it is not a published scholarly claim. So either you remove yours completely or let other statements be here or let us simply make the section point to Telugu Script article. I will do that right now. As any way scripts are very irrelevant and then we will have to talk about the scripts of other members of the Tamil-Kannada branch also: Tamil, Malayalam and so on Periannan Chandrasekaran 18:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved by nominator as an uncontested move. ( non-admin closure) Celia Homeford ( talk) 10:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Tamil–Kannada languages → South Dravidian languages – Larger branches need priority over smaller inner branches, there is a page for Proto-South Dravidian language and Northern Dravidian, there should be a page for the southern branch too. We could move this page and make appropriate changes to accommodate Tuluic. AleksiB 1945 ( talk) 10:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky ( talk) 15:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
@ TrUtHJan: While I appreaciate the fact that you finally start to read one of our sources instead of removing their citations, you should nevertheless read them all and cite them faithfully.
Krishnamurti (2003) classifies South Dravidian (= South Dravidian I) as follows on page 21:
Zvelebil (1990) classifies Tamil-Tulu (= South Dravidian I) as follows on page 56 [1]:
The only difference between their classification is Krishnamurti's inclusion of Koraga (not included by Zvelebil because of lack of data), and Zvelebil's trifurcation of the branch within the Tamil-Kannada languages that is coordinate to Kannada-Banaga, i.e. Tamil-Malayam, Irula, Kodagu, Kota and Toda (Krishnamurti has more complex nesting here).
But both scholars do not have Tamil-Kannada as a primary branch of the Dravidian languages. In both classifications, South Dravidian (in the narrow sense) bifurcates into Tulu and Tamil-Kannada.
@ Roshan Dickwella: Please comment here also (I think we are in agreement about what the sources say) when (or before) making further reverts. We're all getting into the terrain of a slow edit war. For terminological clarity, I will add a citation to Steever's handbook later. IMO, we should strictly follow Steever in using South Dravidian for SDr I and South-Central Dravidian for SDr II. Austronesier ( talk) 07:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
there have been clearly mentions of Tamil-Kannada as alt name for South Dravidian I...Where? Not on page 470 of Krishnamurti's book. – Austronesier ( talk) 16:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)