Dear Prof. Kulkarni,

 copula : Can this be point of distinction between Dravidian and Indian IE languages? Vedic, Sanskrit and Prakrits too have the copula-less NP-NP sentences. Malayalam has the copula aaNu in affirmative NP-NP sentences. The negative forms of the affirmative NP-NP sentences in almost all Dravidian languages have copula (kaadu/kaanu/kaavu type). This evidence in negative sentences leads to the consideration of Ak (Tamil) Agu(Kaannada) Agu (Telugu) derived copula in the 'ground structure' of the copula-less surface structures. Does this descriptive consideration have a historical implication for pre-historic Dravidian syntax?

 

Bhartrihari in VP calls the copula-less NP-NP sentences in Sanskrit as 'as'rutakriyAvAkya'. At some places he uses expressions such as kriyAs which are s'rutA or as'rutA. This implies that for Bhartrihari 'kriyA' (asti/bhavati type) does exist in these sentences in an  as'rutA form.

 

Can the Vedic Sanskrit Prakrit NP-NP structure be considered as Dravidian influence?    
--