[Re: Comparative linguistics]

[Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan]

The views of Hindutvavadins who may think that they are praising Tamil by
calling it a Prakrit
will be dismissed with outright contempt by even devout Tamilphile Hindu
Tamils.

Consider the following two verses of campantar, the militant zaiva saint of
the 7th century AD.

AkamattoTu mantiragkaL amainta cagkata pagkamA
pAkatattoTu iraittu uraitta can2agkaL veTku uRu pakkamA
mA katakkari pOl tirintu purintu nin2Ru uNum mAcu cEr
Akatarkku eLiyEn2 alEn2 tiru AlavAy aran2 niRkavE.  (tEv. 3.39.2)

cantucEn2an2um intucEn2an2um tarumacEn2an2um karumai cEr
kantucEn2an2um kan2akacEn2an2um mutal atu Akiya peyar koLA
manti pOl tirintu AriyattoTu centamizp payan2 aRikilA
antakarkku eLiyEn2 alEn2 tiru AlavAy aran2 niRkavE. (tEv. 3.39.4)

Another saint, appar (6/7th century AD) says of ziva,

vaTamoziyum ten2 tamizum maRaikaL nAn2kum An2avan2 kAN (tEv. 6.87.1)

In a nutshell, for these devout zaivas, Sanskrit and Tamil are equals.
Prakrit is a shameful deformation of Sanskrit. So it cannot be Tamil's equal.
campantar sang these verses in Madurai before his debates with the jains whom
he criticized as speaking Prakrit and not knowing/speaking either Sanskrit or
Tamil. appar praises ziva as one who became Sanskrit, Tamil, and four vedas.

If Hindutvavadins want to do politico-religious linguistics, then  they
should give this due consideration.

Regards
S. Palaniappan