potters, brahmins, and RSis

[Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan]

In a message dated 97-10-03 10:44:28 EDT, narayana at HD1.VSNL.NET.IN writes:

<< In the evolution of a language the natural tendency will be to replace
 the difficult to pronounce or difficult to write letters with easy ones.
 In telugu the tendency as far as I know has been to replace `R' with `r'.
 I am subject to correction on this point.

 For the root `pa' or `paravu' denoting spread we have, in addition to
 the `r' form (`parapu'), we have also the form `PaRuchu' with the same
 sense.

 Now my question is, how strong is the etymological evidence for
 derivation of pArpan from `pAr' to see. >>

I do not think we can easily explain language change on the basis ease of
pronunciation. It is more complex than that. For instance, how come the
former Tamil speakers of present Kerala, found it easy to maintain the
distinction between L and z while most Tamils in present Tamilnadu found it
hard? If one watches the Tamil movies of today, one will wonder if Tamils
have contrasts between n2 and N, l, and  L and so on. Some mispronounce L as
l and others vice versa. It is hard to classify easy and hard sounds. I think
for present day film actors, all sounds are hard. Hearing the Tamil film
dialogues is so disheartening that I have virtually given up seeing Tamil
films.

Coming back to alternation of r and R, I think there has been some confusion
even during CT period. If you see DED, the words you cite are listed under
those with r.

Etymological evidence to derive "pArppAn2" from "pAr" is just the structure
word itself. The left most CVC is "pAr". "pAr" as a verb is usually used in
the sense 'to see'. DED lists "pArppAn2" under "pAr" (to see).  I have shown
for the first time that "pAr" could signify "to worship".

Regards

S. Palaniappan