Q: Historical Tamil syntax

[Vidhyanath Rao]

I would like to know how far back we can trace the following usage in
Modern Tamil: The "future" form (historically derived from the non-past)
is also used in case of states considered to be intrinsic or permanent,
even if the referent is not alive. For example,

    1) avar nalla uyaramaay iruppaar
        He was quite tall. [In English, 'was' is required if the
        referent is dead.]
    2) madurai maNi iyer na_nRaaka shaNmugapriyaa paaDuvaar.
        Madurai Mani Iyer was good at singing Shanmugapriya.

It does not seem easy to find examples of such situations from the
oldest Tamil texts. Whether a given form is considered a participle or
a finite verb also seems to vary with the authority consulted, making
it harder to classify a given sentence as nominal or not.

[These cannot be waved away as historical presents. Use of past forms
here change the meaning: saying paaDi_naar in 2) makes it seem to refer
to a specific concert; saying iruntaar in 1) sounds strange.]