The Independent Origin Theory
Discussion about the Independent Origin Theory
Many Malayalam scholars propose that Malayalam evolved directly from Proto-Dravidian.
This theory was first propogated by Atoor Krishna Pisharody through his word 'Bhashasahithyacharitam' and 'Malayala bhashayum sahityavum'. K.M George ,Dr. Godavarma, Achutha Menon, R. Narayanapannikkar, K.N Gopala Pilla, K. Unnikidav are supporters of this theory.
Historians like Kesavan Veluthat and MGS Narayanan argue that Kerala developed a distinct political and linguistic identity during the reign of the Perumals, who founded their state in the 9th century AD with Mahodayapuram as its capital. They suggest that it was under the rule of the Chera Perumals that Kerala first experienced unity under a single political system. It was during this era that Malayalam emerged as an administrative language, signifying the acquisition of a political identity.
These scholars contend that Malayalam, Telugu, Kannada, and Tamil have their direct roots in Moola Dravidam (Proto-Dravidian). Godavarma specifically highlighted that Malayalam did not evolve directly from Tamil.
Expanding on this notion, Chelanattu Achuthamenon suggests that the origin and development of the Malayalam language can be traced through its folk songs and traditions. This perspective underscores the importance of indigenous cultural expressions in understanding the linguistic evolution of Malayalam.
Attoor Pisharody argues that there were no significant geographical boundaries separating the Chola and Pandiya Kingdoms. Therefore, the language spoken in these regions only had variants but couldn't become separate languages with their own identities. However, separated by the Western Ghats, Kerala; separated by the Nilgiris and other mountains, Karnataka; extending eastward to the Vindhyas and toward the east coast, the Telugu country - the proto-language in these regions separated into different languages due to geographical and other factors. The term 'Tamil' was synonymous with language.
Pisharody is of the opinion that Centamil was the first language in the branch to have a literary tradition, and it had a specific region in Ancient Tamilakam where it was spoken. This is evident from many references such as "centamiḻ nilattuvaḻakkoṭu civaṇi" in Tholkappiyam and "centamiḻ koṭuntamiḻenṯirupakutiyil" in Chilappathikaram. According to him, Centamil was a modified language where the Proto-Dravidian 'a' was changed to 'ai'. In Telugu and Malayalam, the '-a' ending is preserved, indicating an early split. However, the palatalization of native Centamil speakers caused the shift from 'a' to 'ai'. For example, cītai, katai, etc. The author of Mozhinul asserts that 'a' forms are ancient. Over time, due to differences in pronunciation, these forms evolved into 'ai' forms. Tholkappiyam and Nannul maintain that 'a' forms are the earlier forms. He further substantiates his argument by saying that when Centamil adopts loanwords from Sanskrit that end in -a, it changes the -a ending to an -ai ending, as in katai, cilai, cītai, caṭai.
Verbs in the Proto-Dravidian language exist both with and without personal terminations. In the Chola and Pandya regions, verbs are typically seen with personal terminations, while Malayalam retains forms without personal terminations. The term "Tamil" in certain texts like the Brahmandapuranam and Ramacharitam refers to the language in general (bhaasa) and not specifically to Centamil.
The similarity of certain words for household appliances in Centamil and Malayalam does not provide evidence that Malayalam is an offshoot of Tamil. Cognates are also found in other languages such as Telugu, Kannada, and Tulu. The abundance of Tamil words in ancient works can be attributed to the presence of other languages in South Kerala. The Tamil kings frequently attacked Southern Kerala and established their dominance, which led to Tamil becoming a written language in that region. However, the colloquial language of old Kerala was not considered Tamil, even if the literary works showed Tamil influence.
Centamil, like Sanskrit, was a language of education. Tolkappiyar mentions four categories of words: iyarcol, torcol, ticaicol, and vadacol. The twelve Kodumtamil regions, which are adjacent to Centamil-speaking areas, use ticaicol. This indicates that Tolkappiyar regarded ticaicol as an independent language.
Godavarma has put forward certain points in regard to Independent Origin Theory
He mentions that various linguistic changes occurred from Proto-Dravidian to Modern Malayalam. The ai- form in Tamil, e- form in Kannada, and a- form in Telugu and Malayalam are different reflections of ay- in Proto-Dravidian. Verbal forms with personal terminations are seen in Proto-Dravidian, which is why such forms are present in both Tamil and Malayalam; however, they later disappeared from Malayalam. The ṉṟ- form in Tamil corresponds to the -ṉṉ- form in Malayalam, a change that took place a long time ago. Similarly, the ṉd- forms in Kannada correspond to the ṉṟ- forms in Tamil.
Another proponent of this theory, K.M. George proposed the following;
Verbs without personal terminations are prevalent in the Malayalam language, particularly in important moods where personal terminations are not used. Therefore, the original forms of these verbs likely did not include personal terminations, which is a later development. Notably, many languages do not have personal terminations in imperative verbs.
Another characteristic that highlights the independence of the Malayalam language is the presence of half-u (ŭ). Additionally, certain Proto forms such as the present tense marker -ān, personal pronoun markers like nin-, the plural marker -in for the imperative, and the alveolar stop ā in -attu, indicate a direct derivation from Proto-Dravidian. These Proto forms represent underlying changes unique to Malayalam.
Several words in Malayalam are entirely different from those in other Dravidian languages. If Malayalam were merely an offshoot of Tamil, these differences would not exist. The geographical isolation provided by the Western Ghats helped separate the Keralites from other Dravidian-speaking populations, contributing to the development of an independent language.
References
Kesavan Veluthat, The Early Medieval in South India, Oxford University PRes, 2009
M.G.S Narayanan, Perumals of Kerala: Political and Social Conditions of Kerala Under the Chera Perumals of Makots (AD 800-1124), Calicut, 1996
ഭാഷാസാഹിത്യചരിതം, ആറ്റൂര് കൃഷ്ണപിഷാരടി, ഒന്നാം ഭാഗം, B.V Printing Works, Trivandrum
Indo-Aryan loan-words in Malayalam, K. Godavarma
The origin of Malayalam Language- The Linguistic theories, Lekha Kumari, 2021 IJCRT | Volume 9, Issue 12 December 2021
Last updated