செம்மொழி தெலுங்கு - பத்ரிராஜு கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தியின் சேவை

மறைந்த ஆந்திர முதல்வர் ராஜசேகர ரெட்டியிடம் ப. கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி பரிசு பெறல்.

தமிழ் செம்மொழி என்று அரசியல் தலைவர்கள் பெரிதாக அக்கறை காட்டாத காலகட்டம். இந்தாலஜி சபையில் தமிழ் செம்மொழி என்று நானும், பின்னால் சிலரும் பேசிய போது, இவர் தமிழ் செம்மொழி அல்ல என்று என்னிடம் வாதாடினார்.

தமிழ் செம்மொழி (Classical Language of India on par with Sanskrit) என்று எழுதியதைக் கேள்விக்குள்ளாக்கித் திராவிடவியல் பேராசிரியரும் உஸ்மானியா பல்கலை துணைவேந்தர் ஆக இருந்த ப⁴. கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி வினாக்கள் எழுப்பினார். உ-ம்: ப்⁴(Bh). கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி என்னை இந்தாலஜி சபையில் கேட்ட மடல்: “Some members make it their mission to sing the glory of one language and one culture (?), i.e. Tamil. The pathetic appeal of one list member to place Tamil on the same footing as the Classical languages-- Sanskrit, Persian and Arabic in India--sounds ridiculous. Tamil is a modern language and not a classical language. Classical lgs are not the mother tongues of any segment of natives in India.” (ஜனவரி 13, 1999). திராவிடவியலாளர் ப⁴த். கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி முழுமடலையும் பார்க்க:
http://nganesan.blogspot.com/2010/01/hart.html
ஜான் சாமுவேல் தயாரித்தளித்த செம்மொழி தமிழ் ஆவணம் பற்றி:
http://nganesan.blogspot.com/2010/02/john-samuel-ctamil.html

உலக அரங்கில் தமிழைச் செம்மொழி என்று நிலைநிறுத்த பேரா. ஹார்ட், சுவெலபில், ஏ. கே. இராமானுஜன், ... போன்றோரின் உழைப்புக்கு நாம் நன்றி செலுத்தவேண்டும். அமெரிக்காவின் புகழ்பெற்ற பல்கலைக்கழகங்களில் கிரேக்கமும், இலத்தீனமும் செம்மொழிகளாய்ப் பயிற்றுவிக்கப்படுகின்றன. அதேபோல, இந்தியாவின் எல்லாப்பல்கலைகளிலும் Classics Department என்னும் செம்மொழித் துறை ஏற்படுத்தி ஸம்ஸ்கிருதம், தமிழ் கற்பிக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்று ஜார்ஜ் ஹார்ட் ஆலோசனை வழங்கிவருகிறார். தெலுங்கு, கன்னடம் போன்றவை தமிழ், ஸம்ஸ்கிருதம் இவைக்கு இணையான செம்மொழிகள் அல்ல என்று அம்மொழிகள் அரசியல் அழுத்தம் காரணமாய் அத் தகுதி தில்லி தர்பாரில் வாங்கியபோது இந்திய நாளிதழ்களுக்கு பேரா. ஹார்ட் அவர்கள் அனுப்ப இருந்தார். அம் மடல்களை பொது அரங்கில் வெளிவருதல் இதுவே முதன்முறையாகும். அவற்றைத் தங்களின் பார்வைக்கு முன்வைக்கிறோம்.

பேரா. ஜார்ஜ் ஹார்ட் - இந்தியாவின் செம்மொழிகள் இரண்டே!
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sirs:

I read with dismay that Kannada is to be recognized as a classical language.  Like French, English, and German, Kannada is a rich and worthy language.  But India has only two true indigenous classical languages -- Sanskrit and Tamil, each of which is considerably older than the other Indian languages and has an independent literary tradition.  Tamil, not known as well as it should be in the rest of India, has an early literature that is entirely independent of Sanskrit, both in its literary forms and its vocabulary.  This is not true of Kannada, whose earliest writings are deeply indebted to and imitative of Sanskrit.  The earliest work in the language is Kaviraajamaarga, whose title and content are entirely based on Sanskrit.  Kannada does not satisfy two of the criteria listed by the Government of India for a classical language.  First, it is not 1500 years old.  The fact that a Kannada dialect may have possibly influenced some Tamil form hardly means it has texts 1500 years old.  Nor is it possible to claim that its literary tradition is original.  Unlike that of Tamil, which is genuinely original, the Kannada tradition follows Sanskrit quite faithfully.  It is not original by any stretch of the imagination.  A comparison of Kavirajamarga with the Tolkappiyam would make this point perfectly clear.  The Kannada scholars feel they have achieved a victory, no doubt, but in reality all they have accomplished is to foist on the world and on Kannada speakers themselves a myth.  To ignore the true richness of one's language and to base one's appreciation of it on a falsehood does no one any good.  The study of language and literature in India is highly political -- Kannada is hardly the only language that suffers from this situation.  Sincerely, George Hart, Professor of Tamil, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

Sirs:

I read with dismay that Telugu will be recognized as a classical language.  Like French, English, and German, Telugu is a rich and worthy language.  But India has only two true indigenous classical languages -- Sanskrit and Tamil, each of which is considerably older than the other Indian languages and has an independent literary tradition.  Tamil, not known as well as it should be in the rest of India, has an early literature that is entirely independent of Sanskrit, both in its literary forms and its vocabulary.  This is not true of Telugu, whose earliest writings are deeply indebted to and imitative of Sanskrit.  The same can be said of Kannada.  The rush to label languages as classical that are nothing of the sort can do nothing but harm those languages.  I could claim English, my own native language, as classical (with at least as much justification as the Telugu scholars have for claiming their language is classical), but I would only succeed in detracting attention from the true worth of the language while propagating a myth.  Telugu and Kannada are not, by any rational criterion, classical languages.  That its scholars insist on what is patently false seems bizarre, for it is utterly unwarranted by the great literary traditions that they study.  This rush to mythologize language suggests to me that the study of literature in India is still immature.  No English or French scholar in the West would question the classical status of Greek or rush to give the same status to their own language.  Rather, scholars study Greek in order to better understand their own literatures. If only scholars of modern Indian languages had such an unbiased view!  If Telugu and Kannada scholars would study Tamil, they would find their understanding of their own traditions multiplied many times.  The same is true of Tamil scholars, who often eschew the study of Sanskrit and of other Indian languages.  The study of Sanskrit will broaden the understanding of Tamil just as the study of Tamil will benefit Sanskrit scholars.  I find myself at a loss to understand why scholars of Indian languages must be so parochial.  To claim one's language is something it is not, or to fail to study other languages and traditions that throw light on one's own, are, to my mind, marks of a scholarly culture that is still undeveloped and immature.  Sincerely, George Hart, Professor of Tamil, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

-----------------------------------------------------------------

அன்புடன்,
நா. கணேசன்

Doyen of linguistics
K. DAMODAR RAO
http://www.thehindu.com/arts/history-and-culture/article593622.ece
Bhadriraju Krishnamurty stands out as a cultural and linguistics icon.

The first World Classical Tamil Conference held at Coimbatore should be an eye-opener to other states and regional sub-cultures for asserting their language, heritage, history, ethos, and their tradition of music, dance and song.

One significant feature of the cultural extravaganza organized by Tamil Nadu was honouring a foreigner who attempted to establish links between ancient Tamil script and the so-far undeciphered Indus Valley script. There are many scholar-critics and cultural activists who contributed to the enrichment of Telugu language and culture and who took part vigorously in the campaign to make Telugu a classical language, a status accorded to Tamil.

It is in this context that one remembers the yeoman service rendered by the 82-year-old Prof. Bhadriraju Krishnamurty, better known as BHK in academic and literary circles. Doyen of linguistics and literary activism for over fifty years now, he was the driving force behind other Telugu litterateurs in disseminating the relevant information, collecting and collating the write-ups on the 2000-year-old inscriptions and presenting the needed data to the government with factual account to prove the ancestry of the Telugu language.

Born in Ongole in 1928, Dr. Bh. Krishnamurty took his Ph.D from University of Pennsylvania in 1957. For his contribution to Dravidian Linguistics, he received Hon Dlitt. from Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati (1998), and Dravidian University, Kuppam (2007). Earlier, he worked as Professor of Linguistics (1962-88), Osmania University; Dean, Faculty of Arts (1973-6), Member, University Syndicate (71-75); Director, Southern Regional Centre, Indian Council of Social Science Research (1978-82); Vice-Chancellor of University of Hyderabad (1986-93).

BHK has written over 25 books and over 120 research papers, both in English and Telugu which include Telugu Verbal Bases: A Comparative and Descriptive Study, Comparative Dravidian Linguistics: Current Perspectives, The Dravidian Languages. Gold Nuggets: An Anthology of Selected Post-independence Telugu Short Stories in English Translation (ed. with C. Vijayasree).

One only wishes the saga of BHK continues forever.