This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
There should be a meaning for 'Telugu' or Telungu. I think the root word is Tel or Tella which has the meaning of sweet or clear in Tamil(telivu) Any other explanations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 ( talk) 07:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Sandeep you are misinformed. According to page 40 of the Dravidian languages by S. Steever the Telugu script is derived from the Ashokan Braahmi script used in India from about 250 BCE as the medium for Mauryan Empire inscriptions. He goes onto state that the Braahmi script is the ancestor of scripts used in North India to the present time such as Deva Naagari and Bengali. You can also look at page 78 the Dravidian languages by Sri Bhadriraju Krishnamurti.
This article mentions Telungu as an older form of the name, but is it never used nowadays? In Malayalam, the word is still Teluṅku. -- Grammatical error 16:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Telungu is actually the dialect of telugu spoken by tamilians. Hence the name would appear in any standard text prepared by a telugu speaking person of tamil origin. It is not the standard term used by native telugu speakers.-- Sandeep346 ( talk) 10:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Wow this was very informative guys. I'd really appreciate if any of you could tell me if I'd be justified in taking strong exception to the spelling "Telegu". Kind Regards, ( Sardaga ( talk) 09:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC))
Need Telugu script for popu and thiruguvaatha at the Chaunk article. Badagnani ( talk) 03:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
WHAT DOES IT SAY....HE FOLLOWED KANNADA LITERATURE WORK TO WRITE FIRST LITERATURE PIECE. THAT TO AT THE MERCY OF KANNADA RULERS. NANNAYYA WAS CALLED ADIKAVI OF TELUGU. THIS SHOWS WHAT TELUGU OWES TO KANNADA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nannayya
STOP UR USELLS WORDS....THIS ALSO SHOWS HOW MUCH TELUGU OWES TO SANSKRIT...THERE IS NOTHING GREAT ABOUT TELUGU COMPARED TO KANNADA...KANNADA LITERATURE IS RICHER THAN TELUGU AND tamil INSCRIPTIONS ARE FOUND HIGHEST IN THE COUNTRY WHICH GOES TO PROVE THAT tamil LANGUAGE HAS BEEN THE RULERS LANGUAGE FOR LONG TIME...KANNADA AND TAMIL INSCRIPTIONS ARE FOUND ABUNDANTLY IN ANHDRA PRADESH. BESIDES MANY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANT PLACES ARE FOUND KANRANATAKA AND TAMIL NADU...LEAVE ASIDE GOD TIRUPATHI which was constructed by the tamil people first,MANTRALAYA,SRISAILAM WHICH HAVE ROOTS IN KANNADA RULERS...HYDERBAD WITH MUSLIM RULERS...WHAT IS THERE IN ANDHRA....
What's the need of slander when we have got history to prove? Nannaya wrote at the mercy of Kannada rulers? What ever their origins are, we find that they patronised Telugu and aided in helping Telugu as an established literary language...What made you think that the coastal Andhra was a kannada land? the rulers are not everything...it's what the people speak...By the way, The Seunas(Yadavas) of Devagiri...they were not Marathas, but they patronised Marathi...that doesn't mean anything...that they adopted Marathi as their language...they suppressed other languages...it's just a part of dynamics...time was ripe for Telugu to be a language of great literary prowness...one ruler or the other...it was time for Telugu to come out...no patronisation or suppression would have affected it...Another point to note is that, as far as I remember, the common script of Ancient Telugu and Kannada was given a name, Kadamba, not Old-Telugu or Old-Kannada. By the way, what does tha prove? Even Tamil script is descended from Brahmi...That Tamil and Sanskrit are from the same stock? And when was Kannada the ruler's language in the south? And as per records, we find Rashtrakutas(doubt even there, but they wholly supported Kannada from Kannada lands) and Hoyasalas genuine Kannadigas...If you check the history, Persian was the official language in the north and Telugu in the south...A theory put forward as regarding Vidyaranya unearthing a mound of gold and establishing Vijayanagar Empire is that Harihara and Bukka, two commanders of Prataparudra, the last Kakatiya ruler ran away with the Kakatiya treasury with plans of a new kingdom, instead of letting it to fall into the Muslim hands and were aided by one godman Vidyaranya in their efforts...If this is not, why do we find Tughluq searching for the two brothers all Deccan? Ramaraya was from Golconda, majority of the powerplayers in post Vijayanagar era---the Nayaks of Gingee, Tanjore, Madurai and others were Telugu, even the last Sovereign of a part of SriLanka...We speak of the eight gems in Krishna Deva Raya's Court, who wrote in Telugu, he may have patronised all the major languages of south for stability, but is such importance given to any Kannadiga(I no where say id Krishna Deva Raya was Telugu)...Surely, it was termed the golden age of Telugu...when did we hear of such in Kannada? As regarding Hyderabad, who told that it's the traditional Andhra? My friend, the Capital was Warangal, the entry point to all south, Hyderabad was a minor mud fort at the time...The battle at Palnad(the so-called Palnati Yuddham), fought between two Chola factions, supported by other groups, is patronised in Andhra, not Tamil Nadu...What do you call that? The Cholas were Telugu? Everyone will ridicule us...The oldest record of Telugu seems to come from one, Kubbeeraka, far before the days of Telugu and Kannada...It is aptly said that Every dog has got it's day...Someday, Telugu was superior, (even if I don't remember any citations as such I would say) someday Kannada, Someday Tamil balh blah blah...But please donot forget that this article is named Telugu Language, not Andhra Pradesh...And if you speak of Andhra, the simplest question I am going to pose is How many Kannadigas are there in Andhra Cabinet today and how many Telugus in Kannada Cabinet? And what have you got in Karnataka? Everything related to Vijayanagar is Telugu, rest Muslim or British(even your state capital)...even the Wodeyar line stood because the Vijayanagar let them stay...Kempegowda was Telugu, the rest of Karnataka, of whose history you are proud of is now, nothing but stones and broken temples...Even VeeraBallala(did you hear that name?), fought a war of attrition in Tamil and Telugu lands, not Karnataka...Actually, Chalukyas came from South Andhra/north TamilNadu...even before Kannadigas came, we got Satavahanas, conclusively Telugu(language may be different)...What have you, Kannadigas, got then, which you call your own which didnot come from the mercy of others? What are Krishna Deva Raya(the greatest Kannadiga, accoding to many)'s Kannada works? How fine are they(if there are any) in sophistication as compared with Amuktamalyada? Kindly tell me of experiments of the sort done by Vemulavada Bheemakavi or Pingili Surana in Kannada(Bheemakavi was of 12-13th century, Surana was a contemporary of Krishna Deva Raya---they wrote poems which can be interpreted in atleast two ways...Bheema Kavi wrote a poem which gives the meaning of Mahabharata and Bhagavata(I am not exactly sure as for the second one)...t's just based on interpretation)...I don't like the likes of you...just empty boasts...as this article is over the language, counter with the depth of literature, not with the history you donot know...
Another thing to note is that there are far more Telugus in Bengal than Bengalis in Andhra and it's obvious that Bengalis in Andhra know Telugu and the same way roundabout...Who cares if Bengali is in Second position or if Telugu is? One thing, we, being Indians, should see that both the languages should maintain their identity and traditions...And regarding 80 million Bengalis...where did they come from? BSF takes the money to allow them to cross into India, communists give them valid citizenships...Just chck the number of Muslims staying on the Indian side of Bengal-Bangladesh border in 1981 and 2001(wait a few years and see in 2011). Talk about the contribution of your language in Indian upliftment...Atleast, our government doesn't counter that, but you have got a blockhead by the name Communists...they patronize everything which idolizes class struggle and crushes the other...Jyoti Basu, Jatiya Pashu as you Bengalis mock him(nothing personal...)...speak of how many of the likes of Nazrul Islam, Tagore, BibhutiBhushan, Jayadeva Bengali produced...If you go for the prosody, even there Telugu beats almost everything, atleast including Sanskrit... —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
117.195.134.205 (
talk) 12:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
What happened, you self proclaimed scholars over Telugu? For the history, you may refer to the research paper by Messrs Samyuktha Koonaiah...Heard the names of Romilla Thapar and Steve Farmer? They are considered experts over Ancient India, expounding everything, including the dates and their interpretations of Rig Veda and the likes, without knowing a single word of Sanskrit? Such are the persons who frame the rules...I think the same may be applied to you people...You know nothing, read a reference somewhere and start expounding your theories, without knowing the facts...Chalukyas were Kannadigas, Nannaya was at the mercy of Kannada rulers, copied from Kannada...note that his writing style is such spohisticated that it's very hard to write something like that even this day...According to you, some Kannada taught him that?...This clearly shows there was literature atleast half a millenium before in Telugu...god knows where it went...Also, there is another raging debate whether Nannechoda(Another Chola!!) predated Nannaya or not...I remember reaing a blog somewhere...the author takes pain to prove everyone originated from Karnataka...Cholas, the Badugas, Chalukyas and many more...Lucky that he tried to prove Ashoka was a Central Asian, not Kannadiga!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.130.47 ( talk) 18:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
What is being argued here is antiquity of indian lagnuages and availability of proof to substantiate the same..this guy(who wrote above) about telugu is total bullshit. He does't have proof,facts and evidences to show how old telugu is. Instead he is talking how many telugu ministers are in karnataka govt..then he should also ask how many telugu ministers are in central govt..the fact that kannadiga rulers gave initial impetus for the development of telugu must be acknowledge. It's during chalukys telugu gained some importance and also during viajayanagar kingdom(again kannadiga roots) who gave telug the prominence. Even Kakatiya had their beginning as subordinates of karanataka kings and ties with kannadigas.
The fact in south indian history rulers of karnataka and rulers of andhrapradesh have never fought against each other. there has always been comradeship among telugu people and kannada people. karnataka rulers and tamil rulers have been at loggerheads for more than 2000 years and this is proven by evidence. This goes to show that Kannada and Tamil are more ancient than Telugu.
Kannadigas and Tamilites are shivates where as telugu are vaishnavaites predominately. All the shiva templaes in andhra are built by either kannadiga rulers or tamil rulers. Go and check.
Infact older tamil works have references to kannada and never telugu. Having more population does't mean anything(or make it older) but it just reflection of their culture.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.30.48 ( talk) 01:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Telugu people are present in every corner of Dravida Nadu(South India) But Krishna Deva Raya is Tuluva and Kempe Gowda is Kannadiga.
Supradeepa composed two pieces - a kaadhal and a thuudhu. He made Tirumalai Nayakkar as the hero of the 'kaadhal'. Hence he named it, 'Thirumalai Naayakkan Kaadhal'. One day, he sought audience with Tirumalai Nayakkar early in the morning. At that time, Tirumalai was brushing his teeth and washing his mouth and gargling. When Supradeepa told him that he had composed a prabhandham, Tirumalai asked him what language it was in. Supradeepa answered 'Tamil'.
Tirumalai retorted contemptously,
"Telugu tenugu; kannaram kasthuuri; aravam adhvaanam".
Meaning: The language Telugu is like honey; Kannada is like kasturi;Tamil is forsaken, discarded language'.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.0.112.76 (
talk) 19:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The 'Telugu Language' article is messed up with inappropriate information and unncessary phrases. The most annoying section is where the language is put so as to prove that it is the best of all the world languages. I am not an Indian, but, love to be one of them. But, this kinda information just irritates one who wanna know about the Indic languages. I'm sure that you guys will never gonna have this article tagged 'Featured' or 'Good'. Please, understand that Wikipedia is not a proof sheet to make readers believe that Telugu is the best, beautiful, must-know-language, blah blah blah. Rather, it is the place where you could put actual information without any exaggerated blahs. DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.225.190.21 ( talk) 04:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
It was me who introduced that section. The two are very famous throughout Telugu spoken area in India. The remaining ones i found while reading grammar books on Telugu. I don't find any reason why this section can be deleted without any proper reason. Hope people who regularly watch this page go through this message. My Mother tongue is Telugu and I was born in Andhra Pradesh. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 13:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The table below shows some short phrases and words in telugu. This is converted from kannada and does not represent telugu words properly. So anyone can correct it and include it in the article. 117.99.85.33 ( talk) 09:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Words/phrases | Transliteration | Meaning |
---|---|---|
నమస్కార | Namaskara. | Hi/Hello. |
నీవు హేకిత్తీరి? | Neevu Heegidiri? | How do you do? |
హేకిత్తీయొ? | Heegidiyo? | How are you? (to a male) |
హేకిత్తీయె? | Heegidiye ? | How are you? (to a female) |
నీవు హేకిత్తీరి? | Neevu Heegidiri? | How are you? (formal) |
నిమ్మన్ను పేటిమాటి సమ్తోషవాయితు | Nimmannu Bhetemade Santhoshavayitu | Pleased to meet you. |
మత్తె పేటి మాటోణ | Matthae Bhaete Maadona | We will meet again. |
తన్యవాత | Dhanyavāda | Thank you. |
హౌతు | Houdu. | Yes. |
ఇల్ల | Ella | No. |
పేట తన్యవాతకళు | Beda Dhanyavadagalu | No, thank you. |
ఎస్టు? | Aestu | How much?/How many? |
ఎల్లి? | Aelle? | Where? |
హేకె? | Heege? | How? |
యావాక? | Yaavaaga? | When? |
యారు? | Yaru? | Who? |
ఏను? | Aenu? | What? |
శుప ప్రపాత | Śhubh prabhaat. | Good Morning. |
శుప మత్యాన | Śhubh madhyaan. | Good Afternoon. |
శుప రాత్రీ | Śhubh Ratri. | Good night. |
సుస్వాకత | su- swagata. | Welcome. |
Among Dravidian languages, Telugu is the third oldest language after Tamil and Kannada. Therefore, the order of the major Dravidian languages is: Tamil, Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam. Malayalam is the youngest language of the family that was split from Middle Tamil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.38.237.14 ( talk) 10:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I've yet again removed this quote farm section from the article, none of them have any context or relevance here. If you disagree, let's understand why. — Spaceman Spiff 12:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Please check people like user: Malaikaran( talk) who are making disruptive edits
The link given for stating that the age is 2400 years old is just an assumption and is not confirmed. It has to be removed within time. Sanskrit, Tamil and Kannada are the most ancient languages and Telugu has its origins only around 500-1000 CE. Plz add that along with a source stating it with confirmed status. Thanks!! Secret of success ( talk) 15:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
"Telugu has .CH and .JH which are not represented in Sanskrit" - ".CH" and ".JH" do not mean anything to anyone. Rather than an ad hoc romanization such as this, can someone please add IPA or a romanization that reflects the actual pronunciation? I do not speak Telugu and this article has not been informative on Telugu phonology. There is also no consonant nor vowel chart under the phonology section. I suggest that anyone who is familiar with Telugu phonology check out the Tamil or Hindi pages to look at what the standard is. I would just do this myself, but I do not understand Telugu phonology enough to do so. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.55.239.30 ( talk) 22:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Some nut cases keep getting cited, claiming Telugu is an Indo-Aryan language. Sorry, but WP works off WP:secondary sources, especially when the claim is blatant foolishness like this. I've checked around a bit, and I can't find anything that reports that anyone even thinks this. Per WP:WEIGHT, it gets no mention on WP unless we can find such sources. — kwami ( talk) 06:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
In page 16 of the book- A History of Telugu Literature By Chenchiah, Bhujanga, he states -"
"Telugu is Vikriti , that is a language formed my modification of sanskrit and prakrit. It would appear that Andhras adopted a form of Prakrit which, in course of development, became the immediate ancestor of Telugu" Nagarjuna198 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC).
I might ask the same of you. Look, it's very simple: Sanskrit is an Indo-Aryan language, correct? In fact, "Indo-Aryan" is practically defined as "descended from Sanskrit". So if Telugu is descended from Sanskrit, then it's an Indo-Aryan language. Not only that, but they say that the Andhras adopted a Prakrit, which became Telugu. Please read Prakrit: they are also Indo-Aryan languages. You you're claiming that Telugu is Indo-Aryan at the same time you're claiming it's not Indo-Aryan. That is incoherent.
As for them being respected linguists, we can't take your say-so. Do you have a secondary source that describes them as respected linguists? Or that this "theory" is believed by anyone of note? — kwami ( talk) 02:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
And many more..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I think it's reasonable to note that Telugu more accurately reflects the pronunciation of Sanskrit than Hindi and Bengali do (assuming that it's true). I tried wording it in such a way as to retain the word 'retain' without making it misleading, but got reverted. Oh well, it's probably not an important point. — kwami ( talk) 11:31, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Any article about languages in Wikipedia must follow the norms of linguistic science. To do otherwise is unencyclopedic and wrong. It's like writing an article on gravity, but ignoring physics. You are simply wrong that linguistic science shouldn't underlie a language article, Nagarjuna. -- Taivo ( talk) 01:08, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
The consonant chart was inaccurate and written in Telugu. This is the English Wikipedia and scientific descriptions and labels on charts such as that one must be in English. I corrected the phonetic descriptions for the most part and removed the Telugu ĩterms, leaving the English wikilinks in place. -- Taivo ( talk) 12:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
There are two issues being discussed here, so I'm separating them out.
"Retention" has been replaced by "borrowing" in the text to make it linguistically accurate. This should not be an issue for further wrangling. On the other issue, it is quite common for non-linguists, especially linguistically unsophisticated people involved in literature or creative writing, to describe languages in non-linguistic terms such as "musical", "rough", "harsh", "sweet", etc. Indeed, one can choose virtually any English adjective and find it applied to some language or other. But there is no linguistically based definition of any of these common, unscientific terms so they have no place in Wikipedia. Wikipedia's language articles are based on science, not upon the flights of fancy of creative writers or pushers of some nationalistic agenda. Yes, it's possible to find unscientific sources that use such terms, but there is no scientific definition of any of these and linguists simply do not use them. One can choose virtually any English adjective and find some writer who knows nothing of linguistics using it to describe some one or more of the world's languages. But it's not science and such unsophisticated descriptions have no place here. Remember that a reliable source in one context is not necessarily a reliable source in another context. -- Taivo ( talk) 09:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
@ Taivo: You are systematically removing the information from the article. Assumption of good faith ends here. I am not going to discuss with you anymore. You should stop screwing with the article. Nagarjuna198 ( talk) 16:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
I am not a sockpuppet of Taivo, and don't appreciate the personal attacks. I don't always agree with Taivo, but he is right on the content issues here, and deserves credit for persevering despite the abuse by Nagarjuna. Linguistic Science ( talk) 07:50, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed that non-linguistic, unscientific baloney about how one 16th century traveller thought Telugu sounded like Italian. It has no more meaning that saying Telugu is the Navajo of South India. It is simply pointless grandstanding without any scientific or even descriptive merit. Telugu is structurally different, lexically different, semantically different, and phonetically different than Italian in major ways. It is not related to Italian in any way. With more differences than similarities, it is impossible to say that Telugu is anything like Italian at all and that comment has no place in Wikipedia or any other scientific article, unless it's an article about stupid things people say about languages. -- Taivo ( talk) 22:18, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
@ Taivo ( talk) No matter how much you try to vandalize the article, you cannot not your point of view. Truth will stand test of time and prove you wrong. wait and watch. Nagarjuna198 ( talk)
Let us all of us compromise and invite fresh eyes instead of losing our civility.NO MORE VANDALISM FROM TAIVO UNTIL FRESH EYES HAVE A LOOK. Please respect this. Otherwise this is degrading into a cheap battle. Foodie 377 ( talk) 04:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Nagarjuna, we established a stable text after you were blocked for edit warring. Your two edits are just as unacceptable as they were before. 1) Telugu borrowed forms from Sanskrit, so "preserving" is just as bad as "retaining". It didn't "preserve" anything, it simply borrowed forms from Sanskrit. 2) Sanskrit did not "pronounce" Telugu letters. That's just an utterly ridiculous and non-linguistic statement to make. Sanskrit wasn't written in Telugu letters and a language doesn't "pronounce" anything--speakers pronounce things and the letters of an alphabet represent either the phonemes of the language or the phones. There is no relationship between the letters of the alphabet and how speakers pronounce the phones of their language. -- Taivo ( talk) 04:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The example raamudu badiki velthaadu given in the article doesn't seem right. Here 'badi' is really not an object (karma). A better example would be raamudu bantini thannaadu (Ramudu kicked the ball.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.23.255.223 ( talk) 12:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The article says: "Telugu is the only literary Central Dravidian language".
I checked it in Ethnologue, and there are two issues with this statement:
I propose to fix this:
The example raamudu badiki velthaadu given in the article doesn't seem right. Here 'badi' is really not an object (karma). A better example would be raamudu bantini thannaadu (Ramudu kicked the ball.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.23.255.223 ( talk) 12:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The article says: "Telugu is the only literary Central Dravidian language".
I checked it in Ethnologue, and there are two issues with this statement:
I propose to fix this:
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
There should be a meaning for 'Telugu' or Telungu. I think the root word is Tel or Tella which has the meaning of sweet or clear in Tamil(telivu) Any other explanations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.13.109 ( talk) 07:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Sandeep you are misinformed. According to page 40 of the Dravidian languages by S. Steever the Telugu script is derived from the Ashokan Braahmi script used in India from about 250 BCE as the medium for Mauryan Empire inscriptions. He goes onto state that the Braahmi script is the ancestor of scripts used in North India to the present time such as Deva Naagari and Bengali. You can also look at page 78 the Dravidian languages by Sri Bhadriraju Krishnamurti.
This article mentions Telungu as an older form of the name, but is it never used nowadays? In Malayalam, the word is still Teluṅku. -- Grammatical error 16:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Telungu is actually the dialect of telugu spoken by tamilians. Hence the name would appear in any standard text prepared by a telugu speaking person of tamil origin. It is not the standard term used by native telugu speakers.-- Sandeep346 ( talk) 10:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Wow this was very informative guys. I'd really appreciate if any of you could tell me if I'd be justified in taking strong exception to the spelling "Telegu". Kind Regards, ( Sardaga ( talk) 09:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC))
Need Telugu script for popu and thiruguvaatha at the Chaunk article. Badagnani ( talk) 03:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
WHAT DOES IT SAY....HE FOLLOWED KANNADA LITERATURE WORK TO WRITE FIRST LITERATURE PIECE. THAT TO AT THE MERCY OF KANNADA RULERS. NANNAYYA WAS CALLED ADIKAVI OF TELUGU. THIS SHOWS WHAT TELUGU OWES TO KANNADA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nannayya
STOP UR USELLS WORDS....THIS ALSO SHOWS HOW MUCH TELUGU OWES TO SANSKRIT...THERE IS NOTHING GREAT ABOUT TELUGU COMPARED TO KANNADA...KANNADA LITERATURE IS RICHER THAN TELUGU AND tamil INSCRIPTIONS ARE FOUND HIGHEST IN THE COUNTRY WHICH GOES TO PROVE THAT tamil LANGUAGE HAS BEEN THE RULERS LANGUAGE FOR LONG TIME...KANNADA AND TAMIL INSCRIPTIONS ARE FOUND ABUNDANTLY IN ANHDRA PRADESH. BESIDES MANY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANT PLACES ARE FOUND KANRANATAKA AND TAMIL NADU...LEAVE ASIDE GOD TIRUPATHI which was constructed by the tamil people first,MANTRALAYA,SRISAILAM WHICH HAVE ROOTS IN KANNADA RULERS...HYDERBAD WITH MUSLIM RULERS...WHAT IS THERE IN ANDHRA....
What's the need of slander when we have got history to prove? Nannaya wrote at the mercy of Kannada rulers? What ever their origins are, we find that they patronised Telugu and aided in helping Telugu as an established literary language...What made you think that the coastal Andhra was a kannada land? the rulers are not everything...it's what the people speak...By the way, The Seunas(Yadavas) of Devagiri...they were not Marathas, but they patronised Marathi...that doesn't mean anything...that they adopted Marathi as their language...they suppressed other languages...it's just a part of dynamics...time was ripe for Telugu to be a language of great literary prowness...one ruler or the other...it was time for Telugu to come out...no patronisation or suppression would have affected it...Another point to note is that, as far as I remember, the common script of Ancient Telugu and Kannada was given a name, Kadamba, not Old-Telugu or Old-Kannada. By the way, what does tha prove? Even Tamil script is descended from Brahmi...That Tamil and Sanskrit are from the same stock? And when was Kannada the ruler's language in the south? And as per records, we find Rashtrakutas(doubt even there, but they wholly supported Kannada from Kannada lands) and Hoyasalas genuine Kannadigas...If you check the history, Persian was the official language in the north and Telugu in the south...A theory put forward as regarding Vidyaranya unearthing a mound of gold and establishing Vijayanagar Empire is that Harihara and Bukka, two commanders of Prataparudra, the last Kakatiya ruler ran away with the Kakatiya treasury with plans of a new kingdom, instead of letting it to fall into the Muslim hands and were aided by one godman Vidyaranya in their efforts...If this is not, why do we find Tughluq searching for the two brothers all Deccan? Ramaraya was from Golconda, majority of the powerplayers in post Vijayanagar era---the Nayaks of Gingee, Tanjore, Madurai and others were Telugu, even the last Sovereign of a part of SriLanka...We speak of the eight gems in Krishna Deva Raya's Court, who wrote in Telugu, he may have patronised all the major languages of south for stability, but is such importance given to any Kannadiga(I no where say id Krishna Deva Raya was Telugu)...Surely, it was termed the golden age of Telugu...when did we hear of such in Kannada? As regarding Hyderabad, who told that it's the traditional Andhra? My friend, the Capital was Warangal, the entry point to all south, Hyderabad was a minor mud fort at the time...The battle at Palnad(the so-called Palnati Yuddham), fought between two Chola factions, supported by other groups, is patronised in Andhra, not Tamil Nadu...What do you call that? The Cholas were Telugu? Everyone will ridicule us...The oldest record of Telugu seems to come from one, Kubbeeraka, far before the days of Telugu and Kannada...It is aptly said that Every dog has got it's day...Someday, Telugu was superior, (even if I don't remember any citations as such I would say) someday Kannada, Someday Tamil balh blah blah...But please donot forget that this article is named Telugu Language, not Andhra Pradesh...And if you speak of Andhra, the simplest question I am going to pose is How many Kannadigas are there in Andhra Cabinet today and how many Telugus in Kannada Cabinet? And what have you got in Karnataka? Everything related to Vijayanagar is Telugu, rest Muslim or British(even your state capital)...even the Wodeyar line stood because the Vijayanagar let them stay...Kempegowda was Telugu, the rest of Karnataka, of whose history you are proud of is now, nothing but stones and broken temples...Even VeeraBallala(did you hear that name?), fought a war of attrition in Tamil and Telugu lands, not Karnataka...Actually, Chalukyas came from South Andhra/north TamilNadu...even before Kannadigas came, we got Satavahanas, conclusively Telugu(language may be different)...What have you, Kannadigas, got then, which you call your own which didnot come from the mercy of others? What are Krishna Deva Raya(the greatest Kannadiga, accoding to many)'s Kannada works? How fine are they(if there are any) in sophistication as compared with Amuktamalyada? Kindly tell me of experiments of the sort done by Vemulavada Bheemakavi or Pingili Surana in Kannada(Bheemakavi was of 12-13th century, Surana was a contemporary of Krishna Deva Raya---they wrote poems which can be interpreted in atleast two ways...Bheema Kavi wrote a poem which gives the meaning of Mahabharata and Bhagavata(I am not exactly sure as for the second one)...t's just based on interpretation)...I don't like the likes of you...just empty boasts...as this article is over the language, counter with the depth of literature, not with the history you donot know...
Another thing to note is that there are far more Telugus in Bengal than Bengalis in Andhra and it's obvious that Bengalis in Andhra know Telugu and the same way roundabout...Who cares if Bengali is in Second position or if Telugu is? One thing, we, being Indians, should see that both the languages should maintain their identity and traditions...And regarding 80 million Bengalis...where did they come from? BSF takes the money to allow them to cross into India, communists give them valid citizenships...Just chck the number of Muslims staying on the Indian side of Bengal-Bangladesh border in 1981 and 2001(wait a few years and see in 2011). Talk about the contribution of your language in Indian upliftment...Atleast, our government doesn't counter that, but you have got a blockhead by the name Communists...they patronize everything which idolizes class struggle and crushes the other...Jyoti Basu, Jatiya Pashu as you Bengalis mock him(nothing personal...)...speak of how many of the likes of Nazrul Islam, Tagore, BibhutiBhushan, Jayadeva Bengali produced...If you go for the prosody, even there Telugu beats almost everything, atleast including Sanskrit... —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
117.195.134.205 (
talk) 12:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
What happened, you self proclaimed scholars over Telugu? For the history, you may refer to the research paper by Messrs Samyuktha Koonaiah...Heard the names of Romilla Thapar and Steve Farmer? They are considered experts over Ancient India, expounding everything, including the dates and their interpretations of Rig Veda and the likes, without knowing a single word of Sanskrit? Such are the persons who frame the rules...I think the same may be applied to you people...You know nothing, read a reference somewhere and start expounding your theories, without knowing the facts...Chalukyas were Kannadigas, Nannaya was at the mercy of Kannada rulers, copied from Kannada...note that his writing style is such spohisticated that it's very hard to write something like that even this day...According to you, some Kannada taught him that?...This clearly shows there was literature atleast half a millenium before in Telugu...god knows where it went...Also, there is another raging debate whether Nannechoda(Another Chola!!) predated Nannaya or not...I remember reaing a blog somewhere...the author takes pain to prove everyone originated from Karnataka...Cholas, the Badugas, Chalukyas and many more...Lucky that he tried to prove Ashoka was a Central Asian, not Kannadiga!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.130.47 ( talk) 18:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
What is being argued here is antiquity of indian lagnuages and availability of proof to substantiate the same..this guy(who wrote above) about telugu is total bullshit. He does't have proof,facts and evidences to show how old telugu is. Instead he is talking how many telugu ministers are in karnataka govt..then he should also ask how many telugu ministers are in central govt..the fact that kannadiga rulers gave initial impetus for the development of telugu must be acknowledge. It's during chalukys telugu gained some importance and also during viajayanagar kingdom(again kannadiga roots) who gave telug the prominence. Even Kakatiya had their beginning as subordinates of karanataka kings and ties with kannadigas.
The fact in south indian history rulers of karnataka and rulers of andhrapradesh have never fought against each other. there has always been comradeship among telugu people and kannada people. karnataka rulers and tamil rulers have been at loggerheads for more than 2000 years and this is proven by evidence. This goes to show that Kannada and Tamil are more ancient than Telugu.
Kannadigas and Tamilites are shivates where as telugu are vaishnavaites predominately. All the shiva templaes in andhra are built by either kannadiga rulers or tamil rulers. Go and check.
Infact older tamil works have references to kannada and never telugu. Having more population does't mean anything(or make it older) but it just reflection of their culture.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.30.48 ( talk) 01:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Telugu people are present in every corner of Dravida Nadu(South India) But Krishna Deva Raya is Tuluva and Kempe Gowda is Kannadiga.
Supradeepa composed two pieces - a kaadhal and a thuudhu. He made Tirumalai Nayakkar as the hero of the 'kaadhal'. Hence he named it, 'Thirumalai Naayakkan Kaadhal'. One day, he sought audience with Tirumalai Nayakkar early in the morning. At that time, Tirumalai was brushing his teeth and washing his mouth and gargling. When Supradeepa told him that he had composed a prabhandham, Tirumalai asked him what language it was in. Supradeepa answered 'Tamil'.
Tirumalai retorted contemptously,
"Telugu tenugu; kannaram kasthuuri; aravam adhvaanam".
Meaning: The language Telugu is like honey; Kannada is like kasturi;Tamil is forsaken, discarded language'.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.0.112.76 (
talk) 19:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The 'Telugu Language' article is messed up with inappropriate information and unncessary phrases. The most annoying section is where the language is put so as to prove that it is the best of all the world languages. I am not an Indian, but, love to be one of them. But, this kinda information just irritates one who wanna know about the Indic languages. I'm sure that you guys will never gonna have this article tagged 'Featured' or 'Good'. Please, understand that Wikipedia is not a proof sheet to make readers believe that Telugu is the best, beautiful, must-know-language, blah blah blah. Rather, it is the place where you could put actual information without any exaggerated blahs. DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.225.190.21 ( talk) 04:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
It was me who introduced that section. The two are very famous throughout Telugu spoken area in India. The remaining ones i found while reading grammar books on Telugu. I don't find any reason why this section can be deleted without any proper reason. Hope people who regularly watch this page go through this message. My Mother tongue is Telugu and I was born in Andhra Pradesh. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 13:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The table below shows some short phrases and words in telugu. This is converted from kannada and does not represent telugu words properly. So anyone can correct it and include it in the article. 117.99.85.33 ( talk) 09:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Words/phrases | Transliteration | Meaning |
---|---|---|
నమస్కార | Namaskara. | Hi/Hello. |
నీవు హేకిత్తీరి? | Neevu Heegidiri? | How do you do? |
హేకిత్తీయొ? | Heegidiyo? | How are you? (to a male) |
హేకిత్తీయె? | Heegidiye ? | How are you? (to a female) |
నీవు హేకిత్తీరి? | Neevu Heegidiri? | How are you? (formal) |
నిమ్మన్ను పేటిమాటి సమ్తోషవాయితు | Nimmannu Bhetemade Santhoshavayitu | Pleased to meet you. |
మత్తె పేటి మాటోణ | Matthae Bhaete Maadona | We will meet again. |
తన్యవాత | Dhanyavāda | Thank you. |
హౌతు | Houdu. | Yes. |
ఇల్ల | Ella | No. |
పేట తన్యవాతకళు | Beda Dhanyavadagalu | No, thank you. |
ఎస్టు? | Aestu | How much?/How many? |
ఎల్లి? | Aelle? | Where? |
హేకె? | Heege? | How? |
యావాక? | Yaavaaga? | When? |
యారు? | Yaru? | Who? |
ఏను? | Aenu? | What? |
శుప ప్రపాత | Śhubh prabhaat. | Good Morning. |
శుప మత్యాన | Śhubh madhyaan. | Good Afternoon. |
శుప రాత్రీ | Śhubh Ratri. | Good night. |
సుస్వాకత | su- swagata. | Welcome. |
Among Dravidian languages, Telugu is the third oldest language after Tamil and Kannada. Therefore, the order of the major Dravidian languages is: Tamil, Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam. Malayalam is the youngest language of the family that was split from Middle Tamil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.38.237.14 ( talk) 10:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I've yet again removed this quote farm section from the article, none of them have any context or relevance here. If you disagree, let's understand why. — Spaceman Spiff 12:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Please check people like user: Malaikaran( talk) who are making disruptive edits
The link given for stating that the age is 2400 years old is just an assumption and is not confirmed. It has to be removed within time. Sanskrit, Tamil and Kannada are the most ancient languages and Telugu has its origins only around 500-1000 CE. Plz add that along with a source stating it with confirmed status. Thanks!! Secret of success ( talk) 15:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
"Telugu has .CH and .JH which are not represented in Sanskrit" - ".CH" and ".JH" do not mean anything to anyone. Rather than an ad hoc romanization such as this, can someone please add IPA or a romanization that reflects the actual pronunciation? I do not speak Telugu and this article has not been informative on Telugu phonology. There is also no consonant nor vowel chart under the phonology section. I suggest that anyone who is familiar with Telugu phonology check out the Tamil or Hindi pages to look at what the standard is. I would just do this myself, but I do not understand Telugu phonology enough to do so. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.55.239.30 ( talk) 22:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Some nut cases keep getting cited, claiming Telugu is an Indo-Aryan language. Sorry, but WP works off WP:secondary sources, especially when the claim is blatant foolishness like this. I've checked around a bit, and I can't find anything that reports that anyone even thinks this. Per WP:WEIGHT, it gets no mention on WP unless we can find such sources. — kwami ( talk) 06:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
In page 16 of the book- A History of Telugu Literature By Chenchiah, Bhujanga, he states -"
"Telugu is Vikriti , that is a language formed my modification of sanskrit and prakrit. It would appear that Andhras adopted a form of Prakrit which, in course of development, became the immediate ancestor of Telugu" Nagarjuna198 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 22 September 2011 (UTC).
I might ask the same of you. Look, it's very simple: Sanskrit is an Indo-Aryan language, correct? In fact, "Indo-Aryan" is practically defined as "descended from Sanskrit". So if Telugu is descended from Sanskrit, then it's an Indo-Aryan language. Not only that, but they say that the Andhras adopted a Prakrit, which became Telugu. Please read Prakrit: they are also Indo-Aryan languages. You you're claiming that Telugu is Indo-Aryan at the same time you're claiming it's not Indo-Aryan. That is incoherent.
As for them being respected linguists, we can't take your say-so. Do you have a secondary source that describes them as respected linguists? Or that this "theory" is believed by anyone of note? — kwami ( talk) 02:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
And many more..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarjuna198 ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I think it's reasonable to note that Telugu more accurately reflects the pronunciation of Sanskrit than Hindi and Bengali do (assuming that it's true). I tried wording it in such a way as to retain the word 'retain' without making it misleading, but got reverted. Oh well, it's probably not an important point. — kwami ( talk) 11:31, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Any article about languages in Wikipedia must follow the norms of linguistic science. To do otherwise is unencyclopedic and wrong. It's like writing an article on gravity, but ignoring physics. You are simply wrong that linguistic science shouldn't underlie a language article, Nagarjuna. -- Taivo ( talk) 01:08, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
The consonant chart was inaccurate and written in Telugu. This is the English Wikipedia and scientific descriptions and labels on charts such as that one must be in English. I corrected the phonetic descriptions for the most part and removed the Telugu ĩterms, leaving the English wikilinks in place. -- Taivo ( talk) 12:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
There are two issues being discussed here, so I'm separating them out.
"Retention" has been replaced by "borrowing" in the text to make it linguistically accurate. This should not be an issue for further wrangling. On the other issue, it is quite common for non-linguists, especially linguistically unsophisticated people involved in literature or creative writing, to describe languages in non-linguistic terms such as "musical", "rough", "harsh", "sweet", etc. Indeed, one can choose virtually any English adjective and find it applied to some language or other. But there is no linguistically based definition of any of these common, unscientific terms so they have no place in Wikipedia. Wikipedia's language articles are based on science, not upon the flights of fancy of creative writers or pushers of some nationalistic agenda. Yes, it's possible to find unscientific sources that use such terms, but there is no scientific definition of any of these and linguists simply do not use them. One can choose virtually any English adjective and find some writer who knows nothing of linguistics using it to describe some one or more of the world's languages. But it's not science and such unsophisticated descriptions have no place here. Remember that a reliable source in one context is not necessarily a reliable source in another context. -- Taivo ( talk) 09:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
@ Taivo: You are systematically removing the information from the article. Assumption of good faith ends here. I am not going to discuss with you anymore. You should stop screwing with the article. Nagarjuna198 ( talk) 16:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
I am not a sockpuppet of Taivo, and don't appreciate the personal attacks. I don't always agree with Taivo, but he is right on the content issues here, and deserves credit for persevering despite the abuse by Nagarjuna. Linguistic Science ( talk) 07:50, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed that non-linguistic, unscientific baloney about how one 16th century traveller thought Telugu sounded like Italian. It has no more meaning that saying Telugu is the Navajo of South India. It is simply pointless grandstanding without any scientific or even descriptive merit. Telugu is structurally different, lexically different, semantically different, and phonetically different than Italian in major ways. It is not related to Italian in any way. With more differences than similarities, it is impossible to say that Telugu is anything like Italian at all and that comment has no place in Wikipedia or any other scientific article, unless it's an article about stupid things people say about languages. -- Taivo ( talk) 22:18, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
@ Taivo ( talk) No matter how much you try to vandalize the article, you cannot not your point of view. Truth will stand test of time and prove you wrong. wait and watch. Nagarjuna198 ( talk)
Let us all of us compromise and invite fresh eyes instead of losing our civility.NO MORE VANDALISM FROM TAIVO UNTIL FRESH EYES HAVE A LOOK. Please respect this. Otherwise this is degrading into a cheap battle. Foodie 377 ( talk) 04:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Nagarjuna, we established a stable text after you were blocked for edit warring. Your two edits are just as unacceptable as they were before. 1) Telugu borrowed forms from Sanskrit, so "preserving" is just as bad as "retaining". It didn't "preserve" anything, it simply borrowed forms from Sanskrit. 2) Sanskrit did not "pronounce" Telugu letters. That's just an utterly ridiculous and non-linguistic statement to make. Sanskrit wasn't written in Telugu letters and a language doesn't "pronounce" anything--speakers pronounce things and the letters of an alphabet represent either the phonemes of the language or the phones. There is no relationship between the letters of the alphabet and how speakers pronounce the phones of their language. -- Taivo ( talk) 04:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The example raamudu badiki velthaadu given in the article doesn't seem right. Here 'badi' is really not an object (karma). A better example would be raamudu bantini thannaadu (Ramudu kicked the ball.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.23.255.223 ( talk) 12:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The article says: "Telugu is the only literary Central Dravidian language".
I checked it in Ethnologue, and there are two issues with this statement:
I propose to fix this:
The example raamudu badiki velthaadu given in the article doesn't seem right. Here 'badi' is really not an object (karma). A better example would be raamudu bantini thannaadu (Ramudu kicked the ball.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.23.255.223 ( talk) 12:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The article says: "Telugu is the only literary Central Dravidian language".
I checked it in Ethnologue, and there are two issues with this statement:
I propose to fix this: