christophe.vielle at UCLOUVAIN.BE
Wed Aug 20 03:56:58 EDT 2008
It remains interesting to note through this
wonderful tool Pandanus database that
Mitragyna parvifolia Korth. = Stephegyne
parvifolia [contra parvi"-flora" Apte] S.Vidal,
same Rubiaceae family as Anthocephalus chinensis
= skt kadamba but in this case identified with
is identified with Tamil ka.tampai, niirkka.tampu
(same in Malayaa.lam), ci_n_nakka.tampu, Mal.
roosu ka.tampu or viimpu,
which means, on the basis of this "sub-variety"
Dravidian lexical classification, that Apte's
identification is not wrong at all, and that two
(close) plants remain possible in this case.
>Take a look at this:
>According to the DED, Skt. kadamba is (not
>surprisingly) Dravidian -- Tamil kaTampu,
>kaTampam, Telugu kaDambamu, etc. It was worn by
>the veelan, a low-caste priest of Murugan, when
>he became possessed. One wonders why the
>retroflex disappeared in Sanskrit -- perhaps the
>voicing of the -T- (stops are voiced in
>Tamil/Malayalam when they appear
>intervocalically) was heard more prominently
>than the retroflex. The -T- retroflexed in all
>the Dravidian languages cited by DED. It also
>gives a variant Sanskrit form, kalamba.
>On Aug 19, 2008, at 9:57 AM, mkapstei at UCHICAGO.EDU wrote:
>>Thanks to all who answered my query.
>>There seem to be several Latin designations
>>for the same plant in this case.
>>The very useful Pandanus database
>>suggests "wild cinchona" as the English name,
>>but I am puzzled by this: "cinchona" generally
>>names several quinine-yielding species in
>>South America. Is it possible that, after
>>the invention of the gin and tonic, drunken
>>malaria victims began to see quinine bushes
>>Matthew T. Kapstein
>>Numata Visiting Professor of Buddhist Studies
>>The University of Chicago Divinity School
>>Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Paris
More information about the INDOLOGY