Talk:Kannada

Origin of Kannada words with examples

Many of the Kannada words are borrowed either from Tamil or Sanskrit. A huge number of them are changed after borrowing by replacing 'pa' with 'ha' For example: paal became haalu (milk), pugai became hogai (smoke), palli became halli etc. --28.34.2.56 08:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC) Maaran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.2.70 (talk • contribs)

True, many Kannada words are borrowed from Sanskrit, but these "Tamil borrowings" are simply shared vocabulary. The two languages (Kannada and Tamil) both go back to the same ancestor and thus share much of the same core words. --SameerKhan 18:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, I agree with Sameer. Maaran, I share your passion for Tamil, but I'd advise you not to do such original research. Linguists have known abot "paal"-"haal" similarity etc., and they're cognates. That's why they've put both Tamil and Kannada under the same language family, Dravidian languages. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont agree to the existence of anything like Tamil - Kannada. Such a language should have had a separate name, had it been true. All the linguists especially from the North would have opposed the grant of classical status to Tamil had this been true. Further Dr.George Hart from CA, USA has clearly said that Tamil and Tamil alone is the original Dravidian language.

Even Telugu uses paalu for milk. It is borrowed from Tamil and they agree, just as Niraivechu is borrowed from Tamil word Niraivetru. Kannadigas dont want to use the Tamil word, but dont have their own word either. Hence they modified it to haalu. I also find many Grammar terms like noun, verb etc dont have corresponding words in kannada but simply borrowed from Sanskrit. All the numerals are borrowed from Tamil. If this is not so, then why did the great poet Bharatidasan, firmly announce that Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam were all born from her(Tamil) womb, but still she is a virgin! (meaning pure and original)? Further, Kannada doesnt even have its own word for "Language" but wants to get classical status. --68.44.2.70 01:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC) Maaran.

I'm not sure you understood what I said. First of all, having a "name" for a language like "Kannada-Tamil" is totally irrelevant. Linguists all agree there was at one point a language (or small group of languages) that we now call Proto-Indo-European. Obviously, that was not what the speakers of the language called it! But assigning it a name like "Latin" or "Greek", simply because those are some of the classical languages that came out of Proto-Indo-European, would be totally inappropriate. When Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam, Telugu, and other Dravidian languages diverged and became separate languages, there was no writing (anywhere in the world, most likely), so we would have no record of what the proto-Dravidian language would be called. Thus, we simply call it Proto-Dravidian, to mean that we are almost totally sure there was such a language, even if we have no record of this.

Second of all, Bharatidasan may be considered a great poet, but I don't think that his words should be argued as evidence against all linguistic studies of Dravidian languages (other than this one linguist you mention). As a linguist, I can say that the status of Dravidian languages is not very controversial in academic circles - I have only come across non-linguists who claim nontraditional origins of Dravidian languages. Linguists (at least as far as I have seen in my career) are not interested in deceiving people about the history and derivation of languages - so I have faith in the work of generations of linguists in India and around the world who have reconstructed the history of Dravidian languages.

Third of all, I really don't understand how "having a word for 'language'" (which is a strange thing to say to start with) is a necessary step in being considered a classical language. All languages (other than those that have been totally isolated for all recorded history) borrow from one another. This is a known fact, and the extent of borrowing has nothing to do with "classical-ness". Classical Latin, for example, is famous for borrowing from Classical Greek. This does not strip Latin away from its status at all. --SameerKhan 05:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

SameerKhan I fully appreciate your views and your understanding of the subject, but please refrain from feeding the troll. If you look at his/her history of edits you will understand what I am talking about. Thanks. Sarvagnya 07:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Transliteration

I have been working on some major edits for the Bangalore page. I've noticed that every major city in India seems to have its name written out in its native script on Wiki except Bangalore. I tried to install a Kannada font and tried to copy those values to the article, but that didn't work. I was hoping someone from this page might be able to add "Bengaluru" (in Kannada) in parenthesis after "Bangalore" on the Bangalore page, since you seem to be experts on the matter :-). Thanks. AreJay 15:00, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Okay I've added "ಬೆಂಗಳೂರು" as found on geonames.de, which is a great source for such things. I'm not a native speaker but many are sure to see it and correct it if it's wrong. — Hippietrail 15:37, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Looks perfect! Thanks a bunch! AreJay 15:49, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In case you need to type Kannada words into Wiki, you can download Baraha from www.baraha.com; this comes with a "Baraha Direct" feature; you can set this to Unicode and type directly into Wiki; this will produce unicode Kannada characters. No need to type it in another software tool and copy it into Wiki.

Alphabet

I don't think Kannada has 52 "alphabets". I suppose it should be letters, or letter symbols, or syllable symbols etc. Should be checked. -- Calypso

---

The language has 52 characters in its alphabet and is phonetic, but cannot represent all phonemes.

Could someone explain this statement? I can't make head nor tail of it; as far as I can tell, it's saying that the Kannada alphabet (actually an abugida) has a clear 1-to-1 (or at worst many-to-1) relationship between letters and sounds (phones), such that anyone familiar with the rules of the script can correctly pronounce anything written in the language (this being what makes a script "phonetic")... okay, makes sense so far... but that it cannot represent all the meaningfully distinctive sounds (phonemes) in the language. The only way to reconcile the second part of the statement with the first is if there are phonemes that are never realized as phones (sounds) in the language... in which case they aren't in the language, and aren't going to get written down either. So what is this supposed to say? Brion VIBBER

Are you sure it's an abjad? The Dravidian languages I've seen, like their Indic neighbors to the north, are written with abugidas. --phma

Quite right there, I thought "abugida" but wrote "abjad". Alas, that doesn't explain how it's supposed to be phonetic without being phonemic. :)

Brion VIBBER

Hrmmm... my guess would be that author means "the spelling of a word is predictable from its pronunciation, but a given spelling may have multiple pronunciations" (i.e. homonyms exist). Pgdudda

As a native Kannada speaker, I can categorically state that there is a very clear 1-to-1 connection between letters and sounds. One spelling has exactly one pronounciation, and vice versa. There is no way a given spelling can have multiple pronouniciations, and no way the same pronounciation can have multiple spellings. The only sense I can make of the sentence that it is not phonemic is that it cannot represent some phonemes in other languages. For example, there is no way to represent the "z" or "f" sound in English using Kannada letters (even though some 'extra' symbols are used nowadays to represent foreign-language sounds). But those are not sounds that occur in Kannada anyway, and so that is no reason to state that the letters cannot represent all phonemes. They certainly do represent all phonemes in Kannada. If there are no objections in the next few days, I will make this change. --ashwatha 23:18, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, you probably can't tell (any more than the average English speaker could tell that their /p/ in <pot> is any different from the one in <tipsy> -- but one is [p_h] and the other [p]). But the Kannada script is phonemic, not phonetic, and it's a good thing too, or Kannada writers would have a hellish time trying to figure out which of the many letters corresponding to an allophone they're supposed to use. I'll give you an example: The initial vowel in <atta> and <attu> isn't pronounced the same; the former is pronounced with a more open position of the lips and tongue.

As a general rule, unless you're Finnish, you don't have a phonetic alphabet. Even the Finnish orthography fails to mark a rather important phonetic feature (the so-called aspiration, which is marked in some learner's textbooks). --Xiaopo ℑ 16:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Are there 49 or 52 characters? (Actually, it says 49 letters and 52 characters, so perhaps there are 3 characters which are not considered letters?) --

There are 49 - corrected the article where it said 52. The reson for the confusion is that traditionally, the alphabet used to be written with 52 letters, even though two of these letters are not really independent letters but compound letters (see article). One more letter used to be written with the alphabet, but this letter is never realized in actual speech or writing and most people nowadays do not consider it a letter by conventional standards.

External sites

Can you also list a couple of sites which teach Kannada? Thanks.

user:Ramesh

If you know of any, no one's stopping you from adding them to the article. --Brion

Done! --ashwatha 23:01, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Categorization

As long as there is no separate Kannada script or Kannada alphabet article, I place the Category:Abugida writing systems here. Pjacobi 20:55, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Script terms

There are some terms used to describe the "letters" but some are only in English and some are only in romanized Kannada. I'm guessing that swaras are vowels, and vyanjanas are consonants. "Unstructured consonants" is a term I don't readily understand, and "yogavaahas" has no English term and I also can't guess what it might be. It would be nice to have all in both languages and even both scripts. — Hippietrail 07:35, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think it should read better now; I tried to clarify those terms in the article; will be happy to do so further if it still sounds vague. --ashwatha 23:01, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

changes

I made some structure changes and added some info - I also removed the unicode chart; we are using unicode for the alphabet anyway, and there is a link to the Kannada unicode chart in the external links section.

That said, this article can do with a *LOT* more information, particularly a section on Kannada grammar and one on its dialects. --ashwatha 04:31, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Canada joke

"There exists a misconception that Kannada is Canadian English which is of course untrue." This is too silly to be in the introduction. If there were such a misconception, it has certainly been dispelled before the eye hits this pert remark. Wetman 09:36, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanxalot for this edit. -- Pjacobi 13:21, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. For most anglophones, this relation is the most memorable point about the language. Canada has a far larger reknown among speakers of English than this language. Dispelling this myth, no matter how "silly", is a key point of interest. It's a little elitist to assume everyone is "smart" enough to consider the points of most linguistic significance as the most important to them. As for tone, a little rewording could make the point seem worthy of its position in the article.

—Methylsoy 21:31, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Classified as Tamil Kannada? what is it?

I don't understand why Tamil-Kannada has been written in the classification. What does it denote?

--Hpnadig 22:57, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It is part of the classification tree of Dravidian languages, as shown by Ethnologue:

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=1559

Pjacobi 01:23, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There is nothing like Tamil-Kannada. It is invented because Kannadigas dont want to give due credit to Tamil. One can also use terms like Sanskrit-Hindi or Sanskrit-Prakrit. But they dont use such terms because there is no living community speaking Sanskrit. Similarly there is nothing like Proto-Dravidian. Proto-Dravidian is Tamil. The word Dravidian itself is a corruption of the word Tamil. Why dont they say Proto-Indo European is from where Sanskrit evolved?

Infobox, color code and design

Diff1: Does infobox really have to be the way it is by this change? Can't the infobox be a better looking one? Also, It is news for me that dravidian language has a 'color code' and that happens to be 'mediumspringgreen'! It isn't all that comfortable for the eyes of readers reading this article, moreover, takes away all the attention from the article to the table. Should the 'mediumspringgreen' color stay? --H P Nadig 01:20, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

As I also mentioned in response to your question on my talk page, it looks like it's also news to you that there's a WikiProject Languages. (It also looks like you're very resistant to change--maybe a little too resistant.) A similar discussion has occured at Venetian language. Maybe before raising all these objections you should do your homework. Wikiacc 03:07, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Though I feel its a raw conclusion, I understand your plight in venting out that "I'm probably too resistant to changes". But don't you think the color chosen is a bit too harsh for readers' eyes? I see that the color code is just a suggestion on the wikiproject languages page. Why not discuss and change it to something better? Also, the infobox looked 'good'. I would say there was no need to change that. Moreover you took the liberty to vanish the color code (or flag) for the language that was added on the article. That is something outrageous. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be in need of some homework as well. cheers, --H P Nadig 17:41, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I do think mediumspringgreen is not the best of colors. However, the WikiProject must make the best use of web safe colors and there aren't too many of them. If you want it changed to something better, you can raise that on the talk page; I have no problem with that whatsoever.

You seem to be of the idea that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." While that can be a very good philosophy sometimes, it simply doesn't apply to Wikipedia, where the whole idea of an article is that it keeps on expanding and changing.

You've completely mistaken my words, my dear fellow. The intention was to have a 'nice and clean' template... See the template in Dogs. The 'nice and clean' template was in place here in this article and you chose to remove it. (I'm suggesting that you could've always modified the existing one to include the missing parameters to get a 'standardised' infobox specified for the languages). Changes are to be made... but not at the cost of dryly erasing all that was done before.

That's how a wiki works. As well, even if it looked good, it should be standardized so that all infoboxes contain the same information for all articles. That is one of the goals of the WikiProject.

[...] read my above words (The standard parameters could've been added to the existing template, as well. There was no need to replace it completely).

About the image: If I removed an image from the infobox, I'm sorry (must not have been thinking because I did not remove the images at Waloon language and Chinese language) and I will re-insert it above the infobox. (My bad.) Wikiacc 17:53, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Its a sad thing you never put that back. I guess you've a lot to say to others when it comes to 'doing homework' and venting out on 'how wikipedia works'. I've never seen someone who's violating it at the same time as he preaches it. Isn't removing exisiting information from the article a violation of wikipedia policy? Do cross check twice before editing article to see nothing gets erased from it!

Quote: (Wikiacc) >>> "Maybe before raising all these objections you should do your homework"

Atleast this is not 'how wikipedia works'. Not everyone would be knowing about the existance of pages like WikiProject Languages, or probably wouldn't have checked the latest changes or proposals made there. These should be pointed in edit summary when you make those edits. There's no way to keep track of all project pages in this vast wikipedia. It is more than stupid to term that 'homework', unless you had left the link to that project page in your edit summary. I would suggest you mind what you write in comments from now on. --H P Nadig 04:55, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

2500 years?

The article claims that the language has been in existence for 2005 years. This is a debatable claim. My intention is not be finicky about the exact date, but can someone throw light on whether the language has been in existence for such a long period? --Vijay Krishna 07:35, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

POV Section

This section was heavily POV, so I moved it here.

Perhaps some useful information can be extracted from it.

Transliteration strangeness

The information in the transliteration paragraph seems to go over from sensible stuff to POV Bangalore spam after some ... The user that added this User:Cg.srinivas, was accused of spamming just an hour prior to the edits on this page. Also he changed the number of speakers from 45 to 55 millions without any seemingly justification. I know to little of the subject to make any changes. -- Larsivi 10:19, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Removed the frequent used phrases section... Its now here: Kannada language/Translations of frequently used phrases. The article needs a rework to a better standard on the lines of Tamil. We'll need to work to ready this to featured article standard. --H P Nadig * ^{\Talk \Contributions} 08:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Some Web Sites for Kannada - Karnataka

www.kannadaaudio.com www.kannadaaudio.com/forum www.kannadaaudio.net www.kannadatorrents.com www.kannadasaahithya.com www.ourkarnataka.com www.chitraloka.com www.viggy.com www.kannadaprabha.com www.thatskannada.com www.totalkannada.com www.udayavani.com www.prajavani.net www.starofmysore.com www.deccanherald.com www.sampada.net www.yakshagana.com www.kamat.com www.asraya.net www.hpnadig.net www.visvakannada.net www.kannadadhwani.com www.prakashaka.com

Gandu mettida Kannada?

I suppose there are few ridiculous things in this article.

• Confusion with Canada (now deleted)
• aptly called Sirigannada (fit only for poets and Kannada chaluvali cadres)

This one probably ain't 'ridiculous'. I can understand your concern over the literati usage, but it is a 'fact', so it does fit into article quite well.

• Gandu mettida Kannada: Well, this was supposed to be the boast of Dharawadis about their 'rough' Kannada.

what you happen to feel is a 'boast' might be the way they show their affection towards the language. Calling it a 'boast' is a POV. --H P Nadig * ^{\Talk \Contributions} 21:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

-Manjunatha (8 Sept 2005)

"Sirigannada" isn't a POV but a fact? Okay. Anyway, instead of "Gandu mettida Kannada" just "Dharawadi Kannada" could have been a better term and conveyed the same information. May be you could have added 'proudly/affectionately called "Gandu mettida Kannada" by the native speakers'. Same thing holds good for Sirigannada too with a translation of the word. That's again information.

-Manjunatha (23 Sept 2005)

Having just come across this article, I'd say that there's an urgent need for an explanation/translation of the phrase "aptly described as 'sirigannada'". I certainly don't know what that means (I'm British), and I doubt that the majority of Wikipedia readers will. Loganberry (Talk) 02:28, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I've now deleted that phrase. I've no objection to its going back if it's explained properly. The word "aptly" could be seen as POV as well, so that needs some care. Loganberry (Talk) 13:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Sirigannada, literally speaking, means rich/wealthy language and is basically used as a praise. I've no objection to the removal from the lead. If it needs to be added, it can be reworded as described by its native speakers and a para about its origin, below the lead. Pamri • Talk 07:14, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Kannada support

How to get Wiki in Kannada Fonts?

See http://kn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Kannada_Support & http://kannada.sampada.net

--Pamri • Talk 10:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Kodava Thakk

Kodava Thakk is another Dravidian language not a dialect of Kannada. It has never been established as a dialect of Kannada by any linguistic study. It shows the influences of Kannada, Tulu, Malayalam and Tamil. --Manjunatha (23 Oct 2005)

Factual Claims

Origin of the word "Kannada" The great poet Bharatidasan wrote "Although you (Tamil) gave birth to many languages like Kannada, Telugu and Malayalam, you are still a virgin (meaning original) and virile." The very word Kannada comes from the TAMIL word Kanivu which means melliflous. Kannada does not have its own word for "classical" and even for "language" and hence cannot be called a classical language although all its politicians are fighting tooth and nail for this coveted status, only after Tamil got it rightfully!--Objective commenter 68.44.2.70 02:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Tall Claims

"Perhaps the oldest language after Sanskrit the Kannada country and language have a rich heritage" Totally uncalled for and unsupported. First of all assumes that Sanskrit is the oldest language (which itself is debatable) and then uses weasel word 'perhaps' to state a biased opinion. I'm going to remove if no one objects... - Cribananda 01:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Not any more uncalled, unsupported, unsubstantiated or biased than the claims that tamilians make. Claims like Tamil is 'the oldest', tamil gave birth to other 'Dravidian' languages, Tamil has the oldest literature, bharatanatya originated in TamilNadu, Carnatic does not refer to Karnataka but to parts of TamilNadu and the one that takes the cake of them all - Tamil originated independent of Sanskrit!! and i saw this one which took my breath away the other day - "sanskrit has borrowed words from tamil!!!" ....bah!!

I found another one. Someone claims that "The Great Greek dramatists of the 4th century" were familiar with Kannada. Call me a die-hard skeptic, but I find that hard to believe. --Smack (talk) 06:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ya, I think this article needs attention. I'm going to tag it... -Cribananda 06:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Both Tamil and Kannada are important languages and have contributed richly to the heritage of South Inida. Tamil definitely has the oldest literature in South India. Bharatnatyam was revived in its modern form by Rukmini Devi Arundale in Chennai which is why the premier centre for bharatanatyam is at the kalakshetra in Chennai. Karnataka also has a very rich culture and heritage and you do not have to compare it to Tamil Nadu or try to belittle Tamil

Not to start the flame war, I think to say that Tamil, Kannada and or Dravidian languagesoriginated independant of sanskrit is not a tall claim but a fact. To claim that Sanskrit has borrowed words from Dravidian languages is not a tall claim but a fact, however uncomfortable might it be to some :-((

RaveenS 17:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Not so tall claims

The statement "Perhaps the oldest language after Sanskrit the Kannada country and language have a rich heritage" was not made up or assumed. It comes from the pen of a well known Historian , The "Kamats". Please refer to Dr. Jyotsna Kamats "History of Kannada Literature" and your eyes will be opened. Historians decide such things based on experience and you dont seem to have much. Stop "cribbing" and put my stuff back where it belongs.

Dinesh Kannambadi

Can someone help with a bit of fact-checking?

Can someone here look at Vanavaasa and add context or confirm what it says? Thanks! --Perfecto 20:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Link to Badaga langauge

Badaga started out as a dialect of Kannada and according to some linguist it is classified as an independant langue. So it will be the first daughter language of Kannada in modern history and that should be noted. RaveenS 17:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Kannada population

Can someone please put the 2005 population for Kannada including second language speakers. Kannada is the only major language unupdated in this context.

Dinesh Kannambadi

how old is Kannada

Kannada belongs to the family of Dravidian (a corruption of word Tamilian) languages. The very word Kannada is from Tamil word Kanivu, means fruity or sweet. But sadly the language is not original and most of its words are either borrowed from Tamil or Telugu or Sanskrit. Even the script is borrowed from Telugu. Many Kannada words are formed by changing Pa in Tamil to Ha. For example, Paal became Haalu, Pugai became Hogai, Palli became Halli, Peyar became Hesaru. Recently some Kannada scholars have claimed classical status for this language. These same scholars fought tooth and nail to prevent Tamil being declared as classical as it is still living. Maybe they are convinced that Kannada is dead or dying! Kannada does not have its own original word even for "language", not to speak of "classical!" Kannada can be called the second daughter of Tamil after Telugu. The numerals are all derived from Tamil. The grammar terms like Noun, Verb etc are derived from Sanskrit.--68.44.2.70 09:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Kannada inscriptions, with borrowed script were not only discovered in Karnataka but also quite commonly in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. Some inscriptions were also found in Madhya Pradesh (Jabalpur) and Uttar Pradesh. As an example, the inscription at Jura (Madhya Pradesh) , belonging to the reign of Rashtrakuta Krishna III, is regarded as an epigraphical landmark of classical Kannada literary composition, with charming poetic diction in polished Kannada metre. This indicates the spread of the language over the ages, especially during the rule of large Kannada empires.

Dear readers, I have been very active in bringing in valid information about the history of Kannada language over the last year or so. Being a Kannadiga myself, i believe its my joy and pride. But however, lets not get carried away about this. Most historians whose books i have read and have in my pocession (Dr. Jyotsna Kamat, Dr. S.U. Kamat, Dr. K.A.N. Sastri, Dr. Romilla Thapar to name a few) do concur that based on inscriptions and literature, Sanskrit and Tamil are older than Kannada. So Kannada is third in line. This is about its written history. Its difficult to make an arguement on the spoken language as Kannada language does go back way before the Halmidi Inscription.

I agree. One cannot use the words of Mahadevan alone and conclude that Kannada is at least as old as Tamil. It is like 4 blind men describing and elephant!--68.44.2.70 09:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Dinesh Kannambadi

But Kannada script is borrowed from Telugu. Hence Kannada cannot be considered as a language but a dialect of Tamil as it has no script of its own!--68.44.2.70 09:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Kannada does not have a single word which it can call its own. It is either from Tamil or Sanskrit. Of course the script is totally Telugu! When it has no word for even common words like "language" how idiotic it is to claim this dialect as a classical language! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.2.70 (talk • contribs)

Hello Dinesh. From a linguistic perspective, both Tamil and Kannada came into existence when the hypothetical Tamil-Kannada split into early Tamil and early Kannada, so I'm not sure exactly what one means when one speaks of one being older than the other. Are you talking about the literature? And in response to Amarveda, the question of whether a language is a dialect or not has absolutely nothing to do with what script it uses. Are you saying English is a dialect of Italian because it uses the Latin script? Or that Konkani is a dialect of English because Goan Christians write it using the Latin script? -- Arvind 03:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply: Yes. Scholars use hard evidence like inscriptions, epigraphs, edicts and literature as a basis to define a language of complete communication, meaning spoekn and written. Its very difficult to use spoken language as a basis for defining the life time of a language. However, indirect evidence does help. Like, the fact that Kannada works have been used in Tamil-Brahmi inscirptions (Mahadevan), usage of Kannada words in Greek plays (Appadurai) etc. Yes I am aware that many historians do agree that Kannada and Tamil split from proto southern dravidian at about the same time, but Tamils may have gained political freedom earlier (due to geographical isolation from Mayuran empire) and hence you start to see Tamil inscriptions in Tamil -Brahmi script (meaning brahmi adapted for Tamil) from about 500-300BC where as current evidence of Kannada language written in a hale Kannada script (some call it purva Hale Kannada script) starts from 450AD. Even here some alphabets show similarity to tamil like aphabets, showing that both scripts emerged from Brahmi adaptation. During the time frame 300BC- 450AD, on can only surmise that Kannada may have been popularly spoken but not used in administrative purposes. However there may be exceptions like the "Tumbula" inscriptions (444 A.D)I have written about in the page for "Ganga dynasty" (western Ganga dynasty). This is a set of copper place inscriptions discovered recently written in Sanskrit language and script but incorporating Kannada words to describe the boundries of a village. So one can see this as Kannada growing in admin usage and importance. Untill further evidence is seen back dating kannada used in written form, scholars i believe will continue to claim that Tamil is older in that its has a older written traditiion.

So we can clarify this difference by suggesting that as spoken language it may be as old as Tamil but with a later written tradition.

Dinesh Kannambadi

Getting the article up to FAC

Hello again Dinesh. Your changes seem to be fine. The distinction between the age of the literature and of the language itself is an important one, which is too often ignored in sources on the net, so it's good that this article makes it clearly. Incidentally, are there any plans to try and take this article to Featured Article level? It would be great if that could be achieved. -- Arvind 16:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Arvind, I believe before it becomes a featured article it needs to go thru a peer review. Incidently, i just added info on literature during rule of Pulakesi II but forgot to log in before doing do.

Dinesh Kannambadi

We'll also need to make the article better than it is. One thing is having more sources, but there is probably also more information we could add on the language itself. Maybe we could take Tamil language as our model, see what's missing here, and try and fill it out over the next few weeks? -- Arvind 19:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply --> My thoughts: Sure. A picture says a thousand words. During my recent travels in Karnataka, I photographed a few hale Kannada" inscriptions from the Hoysala period. One of those would do good to show what old Kannada charactiers looked like. I will create a .jpg file and drop it into this page. We need to sjow Kannada text from other sources, like the badami cave inscriptions / palm leaf manuscripts etc which will show the progression of the written script, Coins with Kannada legends on them etc. We need to get more people into the fray to look over the contents. I have provided a link in the page for "chalukya"/"hoysala" where we can get pictures of coins with Kannada legends starting with Kalyani Chalukyas. But I am not sure if these can be reproduced without permission. Recently Badami chalukya coins with Kannada legends were discovered (S.U Kamat), but not sure where to get pictures from. Even the current content can be better arranged rather then having large lumped paragraphs ( i am guilty here). Will think more about this in a bit. Regarding references, I dont have access to actual Kannada books or books written about Kannada language/poetry in particualar. You are right, the more books we refer, more info comes out. We need to focus on Grammar, consonants, vowels, Phoenetics etc but I am probably the wrong person for this (though I am confident of my Kannada writing skills)

Dinesh Kannambadi

The photographs of Hale kannada inscriptions sound excellent! Do you have one of the actual Halmidi Inscription? What would be even better is if we could transcribe one of the inscriptions in its original form, and then rewrite it in modern Kannada, to show the changes in the language. Do you think that would be possible?

My Kannada is unfortunately mostly at spoken level, I can't write it at all though I can read it (slowly). We should explain the grammar with examples. You can see here what the Tamil language article's section on grammar looked like when it was approved as a featured article. The section is much shorter because there is a dedicated article on Tamil grammar) - we should aim to have at least that extent of information in the article. We also need at least one sound sample, an example of a Kannada passage to show the structure, information about the Sanskrit element in Kannada, and so on. I'm sure we can manage to do all this, and it's probably worth taking several weeks or even months if necessary to make sure we do it well. Do you think there may be people on the Kannada Wikipedia who can help? -- Arvind

I believe someone has created a Kannada version of wikipedia (cant recall his name) but we should be able to locate him. I will look into this. If anyone can helps us with grammar etc, he can. I dont have the Halmidi inscription. Got too involved in actual elements of Hoysala architecture in lesser known places in Hassan (Doddagaddavalli, Nuggihalli etc) and ran out of time there, though i must say i was within 10kms from Halmidi village. Next time for sure.

Dinesh Kannambadi

Found it. Kannada wikipedia link is at bottom of english version page we have been editing so far. Unfortunately, i cant pick up the fonts with my laptop. I know i can see better on my desktop at home. In the meatime, take a look and see who is eidting this page. Incidently, I dont remember seeing wikipedia in any other language.

Dinesh, Arvind: Kannada wikipedia was started in September 2004, and as of now its growing well. Its URL: http://kn.wikipedia.org

I have been contributing more there, compared to en.wikipedia.

It is indeed a good idea to work on this article to make it as a featured article. I can help on grammar things which you both are discussing, in whatever ways possible. If there is something which needs more information, we have a mailing list in kn.wikipedia and by posting there, we can get more attention and more information what we need. - KNM ^{Talk - Contribs} 19:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe that HP Nadig is also active in Kannada Wikipedia. He once invited me for the Kannada Wikipedians' meet (perhaps as "an external observer" to use a cliche from diplomatic terminology ;). -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Kannada script derived from Sanskrit script? Dineshkannambadi 19:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Can someone who understands develpoment of Kannada script study this latest paragraph put in by an unidentified person and see if it makes sense. I for one am not qualified to make a comment on this. I always read and believed that the Old kannada script came from the Kadamba script which evolved from the Bhrami script. It so happens that the sanskrit devanagari script also emerged from the Bhrami script. This is my understanding. Dinesh Kannambadi

List of changes needed

• Kannada flag which is usually associated with the language can be put up on the article.
• A screenshot of Kannada Wikipedia can be posted here on the Kannada Script section.
• There were some images put on the article long back (of old scriptures and couple of screenshots). Can someone hop back into the article history and restore them back?
• Does the Misinterpretation section really need that much of highlighting?
• History section needs some images.

--H P Nadig * ^{\Talk \Contributions} 07:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Kannada inscriptions Dineshkannambadi 18:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I have added Images of a couple of old Kannada inscriptions taken by me on my recent trip in Hassan/Mandya. I have looked through my files and picked two inscriptions that were more clear than the rest. It seems like with the large number of inscriptions available, the Karnataka government does not (and understandably so) provide extra protection to most other than allowing these inscriptions to remain on temple premisis. I suspect that only critically important ones are stored in archives. Most of the inscriptions I saw were readable but not always photographable either because of clarity or size. Generally, these inscriptions are anywhere from 5-8 feet tall, 3-4 ft wide and can weight several hundred Kgs. During my future trips I will try to get photos of inscriptions spanning several centuries (including copper plate inscriptions which I presume are more likely to be in museums). I also undestand there are several well known numismatists in Mangalore/Udupi area who can help us with coinage. Enjoy!!

Dinesh Kannambadi

Please log in while making edits

Of late there hve been lots of vandalism on this page, and generally, those who vandalise dont log in. I see a lot of edits without a log in name and this sometimes makes it difficult to judge if these are genuine edits or vandalism.

Dinesh Kannambadi