Talk:Malayalam/Archive 1

Earliest mention of Malayal(am) outside India

The Garaman inscription of 1053 A.D. also adds to the list the name Malyala (the Malayala-speaking region of the Malabar coast).

http://ismaili.net/Source/0104c.html

This should be incorporated in the article because by 1053 merchants from present day Kerala are self identifying them as Malayala to foreigners. RaveenS 22:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Malayalam is the same when spelt in reverse! - It comes from the Tamil word, malai means mountain and aali means person or aal. - The people who spoke Tamil in the mountainous Tamil country called Chera naadu, (Western Ghats) were called Malai aali later Malayali and the language Malayalam.

The great Tamil poet Bharathidasan said "Even though you(Tamil) gave birth to other languages like Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam, you are still virgin and virile" Tamil hymns are recited in Tirumala Temple (the richest in the country) and other temples along with Sanskrit ones, and I have heard them too. Is there a single Malayalam hymn, which is recited at Tirumala?

The very word Tirumala is a Tamil word. Kannada came from the Tamil word.. Kanivu, meaning mellifluous. Telugu came from Tamil word, Thella, meaning clear and sweet. Malayalam came from Tamil word, Malai meaning mountain and aali meaning person.. Persons living in mountainous region (namely, Western Ghats.).. Another word is Arivaali (meaning person with arivu or intelligence.

Tamil is the only language which has its own word for Veda.. Marai. --209.212.28.18 14:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC) Malayalam lover

Differences between Malayalam and Tamil

What are the differences between Malayalam and Tamil?

I speak Tamil (natively) and Telugu but not Malayalam.

That's too little to ask and too much to answer. They are obviously two different languages, though they have common roots. Malayalam is believed to have developed from a dialect of Tamil called Koduntamil or Malaithamil (literally Tamil of the mountains), spoken by the people around the hilly ranges bordering Kerala and Tamil Nadu states. But like other Dravidian languages, and unlike Tamil, it has borrowed heavily from the Brahmic script. Unlike Tamil, it has conjunct consonants and aspirated and voiced stops. For example, it has four gutturals, four nasals and so on (each pronounced with varying degrees of stress.) Malayalam is believed to have matured sometime around 16th century as a distinct language with the advent of people like Thunjathu Ezhuthachan (who incidentally authored Srimad Bhagavatam - the ballad sung in praise of Vishnu in his 10 avatars. It is more influenced by Sanskrit than any other Dravidian language. Malayalam is the only language in the world apart from Tamil to share the retroflex rzh sound. (Marathi coming close with the hard la). That's as much as I can say from my limited knowledge. Chancemill 17:00, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, Malayalam developed an identity distinct from Tamil around the 13th to 14th centuries. The Namboothiris were influential in the development of Malayalam as a distinct language, and also the Sanskrit influence in Malayalam. Compared to Tamil, Malayalam has a larger phoneme set. In addition, Malayalam has a number of arabic, Chinese, and pali words. An interesting thing to note is that the Arabic word for Chair (kursi), and the Malayalam word for chair (kasera) are rather similar. They both possess the same set of consonants in the triconsonantal root (krs and ksr). However, it may be a false cognate. I'm just hypothesizing :). Sanksrit's influence in Malayalam is evident from the large number of Sanskrit and Indo-European words. For example, compare the Malayalam words for orange (narenga), table (mesha), and soul (atma) to the Spanish words for the same (naranja, mesa, and alma). This is definitely due to Namboothiri influence. Malayalam is the closest in similarity to Tamil, and actually has the least Sanksrit influence. Telugu and Kannada are also related to Tamil, but have diverged significantly from it. --Vivin 18:40, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Atma, of course, came to Malayalam from Sanskrit. Spanish and Portuguese being Indo-European languages, their having the same word, Alma, is not surprising. The Malayalam word 'kasera' (chair) came from the Portuguese word 'cadeira' (chair). Mesha came from Portuguese Mesa (table). There are more than 20 words in Malayalam that is of Portuguese origin. They sound so Malayalam-like that many Malayalis would be surprised to hear that they came from Portuguese. {Some examples: Kushini from Cozinha (kitchen), Janal/janala from Janela (window), Pena (pen), Rosa (rose)}

Naranga is said to be an Indian word that went to Europe, (through the Arabs?) and became naranja (pronounced naraanha) in Spanish and Orange in English. Its origin is said to be Sanskrit (Naraganga?) or Tamil (Naran kai?)

I don't understand the statement that Malayalam "actually has the least Sanskrit influence." Could you explain? With the vast number of Sanskrit vocabulary in it, isn't Malayalam the South Indian language with the most Sanskrit influence?

it was not ezhuthachan

melpathoor narayana bhattathiri, not thunchathezhuthachan, was the author of narayaneeyam. ezhuthachan was one of the pioneers among the writers in modern malayalam language. perhaps his most popular work is adhyatma ramayanam kilippattu. he is also considered as the author of books like bhagavatham kilippattu, mahabharatham kilippattu, irupathinalu vrtham, harinama keerthanam.

Malayalam in Firefox

Does anyone knows why Malayalam support in Firefox/Win XP is messed up? TIA --Rrjanbiah 05:44, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In MS-Win you have to enable support for complex script.

To do it go to Windows Control panel "Regional and Language Options" > "Languages" check both boxes.

Thanks for your reply. I know, how to enable the language suport in XP and already enabled. But, the issue is with Mozilla Firefox (my pet browser:) ) as the pages are working fine in Internet Explorer. I have posted the issue at the Mozilla forum [1] and probably will add it to the formal bug database sometimes soon. --Rrjanbiah 04:30, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Recent update on the issue: When I posted the issue at news:netscape.public.mozilla.browser few people have responded that for them Firefox is rendering properly. After bit of try, I have found that we need to install ThoolikaUnicode font [2] to see the Malayalam characters in FF. However IE works without ThoolikaUnicode font. Discussion is still going in netscape.public.mozilla.browser --Rrjanbiah 10:22, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Kodum Malayalam

Living in Kerala I never heard about Kodum Malayalam or never studied it at school. Only distinction we hear is proper written-language (Ezhuth Bhasha) or not.

Yes there are slangs, and many of them from north to south of Kerala, or slangs near sea or slangs near hills in the east. Even there are slang that are unknown in 1 mile area or only in a community. But never heard of Kodum Malayalam.

I agree there are people who speak with style or words in Tamil or Tulu. But they are just a mixture of Malayalam and the other language.

A Google search for "Kodum Malayalam" only shows reference to sites which copied it from Wikipedia.

So I am deleting the entry of Kodum Malayalam by 203.101.73.166 (talk · contribs)

If somebody disagree we will have a discussion then change it.

-Bijee 28 June 2005 22:26 (UTC)

As with all Indian langauges, Malaylam too is different amongst different social groups. The Sanskrit content is high amongst the so called upper castes and is the lowest amongst the so called lower castes. Kodum Malayalm is a term used to denote Malayalm with minimal Sanskrit content spoken by these people and tribals. So the view Malayalm is what it is as defined by the elites is not correct.

22:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Assistance required at Kalaripayattu

I've just spotted the following in a comment at the top of the Kalaripayattu page:

There is a slight problem with the malayalam spelling. I was unable to get the double pa, It would be great if some one could fix that.

I have got no idea what a double pa is or how to get it, (or even if it has been fixed already), so I would appreciate it if someone who does can fix it. Thanks, Thryduulf 18:38, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

-- Update: This article is now named Kalarippayattu, with double ppa. However, I noticed a number of problems with Malayalm spellings there. Since the subject is disputed, and since I am not a native writer, I posted my thoughts in the Talk:Kalarippayattu#Spelling section, and I defer on more knowledgeable people to commit the changes. Then remove all this section! Thanks. -- AntoineL 14:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

VFDs

Please vote on the following VfDs related to Kerala :

• Sanal Edamaruku
• I. V. Sasi
• List of Famous Nairs
• Sebastian Kappen

Removed text

This is the first time I read this article and the following section in general seemed a bit POV. Of concern are the "coming into its own" and "remarkably liberal" parts. Please fix accordingly as you see fit. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 17:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Planning and development

As the language of administration and as the medium of instruction in schools and colleges, Malayalam is coming into its own. A scientific register in the language is slowly evolving. Remarkably liberal in their attitudes, Malayalis have always welcomed other languages to coexist with their own and the interaction of these with Malayalam has helped its development in different respects.

Promotional Material ?

"In 1999 a group called Rachana Akshara Vedi, led by Chitrajakumar and K.H. Hussein, produced a set of free fonts containing the entire character repertoire of more than 900 glyphs. This was announced and released along with an editor in the same year at Thiruvananthapuram, the capital city of Kerala. In 2004, the fonts were released under the GNU GPL license by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation at the Cochin University of Science and Technology in Kochi, Kerala."

How exactly is this Promotional Material ? Rachana Akshara Vedi has become a cultural icon with regard to the Malayalam script in bringing back the Traditional script. If this work is not acknowledged, then I would suggest that the paragraph above it also be removed (reproduced below):

"Malayalam now consists of 56 letters including 20 long and short vowels and the rest consonants. The earlier style of writing is now substituted with a new style from 1981. This new script reduces the different letters for typeset from 900 to less than 90. This was mainly done to include Malayalam in the keyboards of typewriters and computers."

This is because the paragraph related to "reform" is entirely mistaken in its validity - first of all, the *1967* reform was not fully accepted, and neither was the *1981* reform (in fact the 1981 reform reversed many aspects of the 1967 reform, and Rachana Akshara Vedi's actions are a continuation of that action). All you need is a good camera and some time in any of the cities of Kerala to know this. In fact, if you remove the paragraph citing "promotional material", then you should remove the reform-paragraph as well, since it too is "promotional" not to mention inaccurate, and partisan to one POV.

--

As far as I can tell, the glyphs of the characters in "Rachana" set fo fonts were not designed by Chitrajakumar and K.H. Hussein, but rather by a TeX enthousiast of Nederland origin, Jeroen Hellingman (could be worth a link, too). This is not to say the Rachana Akṣara Vedi group did nothing here, in fact they did produce the set of fonts (along with the editor), but I consider it would be fair to acknowledge also Jeroen's work; even if he is not a Malayali, this fact should be irrelevant (one can also drop the fact that Jeroen comes from the Nederlands, however). On the other hand, if it was Jeroen that specifically requested him to be left unnamed, this should be recorded in some way (besides history, that is), at least to avoid posts like mine! -- AntoineL 13:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

--

Joeren Hellingman did make a Malayalam font, which was converted by NV Shaji and by others. It is usually distributed by Linux distributions with the name "Malayalam" in their Malayalam font package. The Rachana font (which has about 950+ glyphs, compared to the 100 or so in Hellingman's font) was developed by Rachana Akshara Vedi - R. Chitrajakumar did the original research on the glyph set bu collecting, culling and collating them and their use, and K.H Hussein designing the font face indepedent from R. Chitrajakumar.

--

Contributions of Hermann Gundert to Malayalam language in Trivia section !?

I feel that the contributions of Hermann Gundert to malayalam language should be expanded in the artcle and moved to an appropriate section. Sangfroid 13:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

---

added the tags of 'unsourced' & 'not verified to "Language variation and external influence" paragraph Bharatveer 11:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

ABOUT the second trivia, i dont think Gundert was the first person to compile a malayalam dictionary.This needs to rechecked. About the third trivia, malayalam was chosen for wireless communication in the indo pakistan border was not due to the "phonetic complexity" of Malayalam language ; OTOH it may be because the "corps of Signal" of the Indian Army always had a significant number of personnel from kerala. Bharatveer 11:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Added the tag 'citation needed' * Development of literature * Bharatveer 15:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

---

About "External Influence" I had added the citation needed to the paragraph. It is very clear that there are not sources to back up that statements. So Can i remove those sentences?? Bharatveer 03:52, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic)

Help add input for Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic) --Dangerous-Boy 04:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

-r ending for personal names

Was the statement I made in the "Borrowing words from sanskrit" section about only humans (including legendary sages etc) having the respectful -r endings for their names not true? I've never come across an instance of any other type of being, such as a deity, having a name ending in -r. --Grammatical error 07:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I have seen temple names like "Mahadevar Kshetram".Bharatveer 07:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Really? Perhaps that's archaic usage (carried over from Tamil, in which I believe the -r suffixes are more prolific) preserved in the temple names, because in modern Malayalam it is always Mahadevan and the temple name would be "Mahadeva Kshetram". --Grammatical error 10:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

See these links

Vaikom Temple

Temples

.Bharatveer 11:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for clarifying that. --Grammatical error 17:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why the whole sentence is being removed? Revered persons/deities have an -r or -n ending, which is inconsistent. They sometimes even have an -m (Narahasimha -> Narasimham. But this is because the suffix is based on the simha part, which is an animal and therefore merits the -m ending). --vi5in^[talk] 03:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Please provide references , till then attaching cn tags will be a good idea.Bharatveer 08:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Looking here, you can see that the -n ending is for masculine nouns. The -r ending, interestingly, is typically used to pluralize a noun with a common gender (eg: manusyan (man) -> manusyar (men)). I am still searching for what this means with respect to proper nouns. IANAL (I am not a Linguist), I'm just stating this by virtue of being a native speaker of the language. The -n ending is way more common than the -r ending:

Krishna -> Krishnan

Rama -> Raman

Shiva -> Shivan

Duryodhan -> Duryodhanan

Narasimha -> Narasimham (an exception since the ending is based on simha which is an animal, and not a man)

The less common -r ending is seen in the following:

Shankaracharya -> Shankaracharyar

Bishma -> Bishmar

I know that the word acharya means teacher, so I'm thinking that the plural in Malayalam is acharyanmar? Or is it acharyar? If its the latter case, then the name would name no sense, because it isn't a plural! The more I think about this, the more confusing it gets. All I know is that the -r ending is comparatively rare. Will do some more research on this. --vi5in^[talk] 18:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Name of language

I can't find in the article where the name of the language comes from. The similarity between the Malayalam language's name with the "Malay" language's name is interesting, but I guess it's just coincidental. Does the language come from the name of the region (as, for example, the Rajasthani or Punjabi languages), or does it have another meaning? Badagnani 20:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The region used to be called malayalam and the language was malayala bhasha or malayanma, apparently (I forgot where I read this). I have no idea how and why such a ridiculous semantic shift should have taken place, but it did and Keralam came to be used as a name for the land instead.--Grammatical error 06:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

It's related to "mountain" [3] Perhaps means "dialect/language of mountains"? See also [4]. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for this enlightenment! Perhaps you experts could add this etymology to the article? Badagnani 08:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Is the final "m" in Malayalam a suffix or separate word remnant meaning perhaps something like land, people, or language? Is saying Malayalam language a redundancy? Is it ("-m") similarly used in other words in the language? I notice in the interwikis that Portugese and Slovene skip this m in their names for the language. Does anyone here speak the language? Or has anyone studied it? O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 21:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

What Christian, Muslim, Nambuthiri, dialects?

This sentence from the 'Language variation and external influence' section, "Loan words from English, Syriac, Greek, Hebrew, Latin and Portuguese abound in the Christian dialects and those from Arabic and Urdu in the Muslim dialects", is an exaggeration.

Abound? Dialects?

Muslims use many Arabic words in their speech, but not enough to call it a dialect. Christians' use of Syriac words in everyday speech is a lot less and that too is mostly in the context of religion. The only Greek or Latin words they use are what other Malaylis and people all over the world use, i.e. Greek/Latin-derived scientific terminology. All Malayalis use some Portuguese words in everyday speech and in the case of some Christians here and there, a few more are used. As for English, all Malayalis insert many English words into their day to day Malayalam, without accepting them as Malayalam words. (This lack of acceptance may be because English words sounds too foreign in Malayalam, unlike Portuguese words, which blend into to the language very well.)

As for the Nambuthiri community's usage of higher number of Sanskrit words, I doubt it is enough reason to call the resulting speech or writing a dialect. After all, Malayalam vocabulary is highly Sanskritized.

Malayalam has regional variations and caste based variations. The only religion based variation may be in the case of some (but not all) Muslims in their use of some Arabic words. Using the word dialects for these variations may be a bit too much of a stretch.

Certain limited words like Lorry etc are used. But how come they become another language. Its absurd. All such errors need to be removed. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 09:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Dravidian tongue?

I am wondering why malayalam has been classed as a Dravidian tongue, since it borrows heavily from Sanskrit, even more than other so called "Indo aryan" languages. In fact malayalam and sanskrit share a very similar grammatical structure and a large proportion of words in malayalam have been directly borrowed from sanskrit. You may say that it has been classed as a dravidian tongue because of the script which has been borrowed from tamil (a dravidian language), then why is Sinhalese, which does not have a devangari script, been classed as an "Indo aryan" language? Kshatriya Grandmaster 22:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is it classed as a Dravidian tongue? Because it is one! The answer could be found in the article. Borrowing vocabulary, lightly or heavily, from another language can't change a language's origin! The assumption in the query that Malayalam's grammatical structure is Sanskrit like, is incorrect. So is the assumption that the response to you would be "that it has been classed as a dravidian tongue because of the script". --Esskay 19:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

That is an interesting point, because Sinhalese script is ideally a Dravidian script, yet it is still classed as an Indo-Aryan language. I guess the work of Nambuthris and Nambyars in Kerala has not been able to sufficiently sanskritize it to make it an Indo-Aryan language! Kshatriya Grandmaster 22:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

need script translation at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation

Need scripts of malayalam.--D-Boy 18:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Selected vocabulary

The selected vocabulary list needs to be put into a more formal transliteration (I can't do it because of browser problems) as it looks a bit messy and out of place at the moment. --81.145.241.180 18:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm wondering if we even need a "selected vocabulary" list. --vi5in^[talk] 17:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Commercial links

Links to private webpages or commercial links or information is included recently to this articles by anonymous users. We may have to remove most of them.--Shijualex 11:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've taken out a bunch and left the most pertinent ones. --vi5in^[talk] 17:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Dravidian civilizations

Wiki Raja 08:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Reposting a deleted post

I have noticed a continuing factor in many pages connected to India in Wikipedia. A few persons feel that they own these pages, and dominate the content. As an international encyclopedia, Wikipedia then exist at the mental level of these persons. Wikipedia should not exists at the level of these mean persons. For, only content that suits their taste is retained over here. An Encyclopedia is not a listing of information from selected persons. It should have access to almost all information that is relevant to a particular subject.

This much I am saying here from seeing the deleting of my post, within hours of its posting here. It may be understood that Wikipedia does allow links to outside writings, whether is in private or public(?) WebPages that have relevance. I am reposting my post again. It is not my concern whether it suits the taste of a few narrow minded persons.

It was thus:

A point of distress I am giving a link to a writing of mine here. The theme may distress the lovers of Malayalam and other Indian languages. But it may be found that it has relevance. The title is ‘Attributes of ‘Sar’’ The link [5] --Ved from Victoria Institutions 04:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the reason you have noticed it is that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. This talk page has to do with "Malayam". Your piece of writing has absolutely nothing to do with the article, and doesn't help us improve the article in any way. Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your writings. I hope you understand that. This has nothing to do with "narrow mindedness". The point is that we would like to confine discussions on this page to the article and not clutter it with needless and completely irrelevant information. This is why your comment was removed. --vi5in^[talk] 08:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Unilateral decisions on what is relevant and what is not relevant is not to be done by a few persons who have only as much right on this discussion page, as any other of the immense persons who visit here. Also it may please be noted that the Wikipedia article are not just for a few persons who are directly connected. It will be visited and studied by persons who have no direct connection as part of scholarly understanding.

As to advertising, I am not selling a product or asking for any monetary benefit. I have written an article that befits a debate on the character of Malayalam. I can very well post that article on this debate page. But I am sure it will be deleted as fast as it is posted. I have had this experience before.

Moreover I have given links elsewhere in Wikipedia to some of my other writings in a uk site’s forum page. This site is actually a busy commercial site. Yet, the forum page has nothing to do with the commercial side of it. Till now, no one has deleted the links. Even though, it is possible for anyone to vandalise it at anytime.

As to advertising my writing, it is that when I have something to say, I say it. I don’t have to take out someone else’s ideas and post it. It may be noted that I have not posted the article on this page to clutter it as is being insinuated. Moreover I have received personal messages of appreciation about this present article, from even internationally reputed persons of scholarly connection with language study.

As to the article not contributing anything to improve the subject matter, I can only say that it will definitely expand the ambit of the subject. It is not for anyone (including the ‘we’) to decide what are the ‘confinements’ the subject matter should have on Wikipedia. I am sure that the subject matter has much to do with Malayalam. I have not attempted any vandalising, or any other disturbance on this page. --Ved from Victoria Institutions 09:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I apologize if I hurt your feelings and if I acted in haste. But to be rather blunt, I still fail to see what your piece of writing has to do with the article. It seems to be more of a sociological piece, without having anything to with this article. I am not saying that your article is bad or anything or that it lacks quality. I just think that this is the improper venue to "advertise" it. Like I said before, talk pages exist to discuss the article, and how to improve it. What parts of your piece of writing will help improve this article? --vi5in^[talk] 18:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Aspiration?

I'd like someone with linguistic knowledge (and not just a native speaker or someone "with a friend who says that..." to write about the presence or absence of aspirated stops in Malayalam. The script certainly indicates aspirated stops from words borrowed from Sanskrit, but I don't believe that Malayalam has aspirated stops as phonemes. And I'm not alone in this. "In the consonants of Hindi the voiced aspirated stops, which are absent even in the standard pronunciation of Malayalam, will be difficult for a Malayalam speaker to pronounce. Usually they are being pronounced with voiceless aspiration by a Malayalam speaker." Geethakumary, V. "A Contrastive Analysis of Hindi and Malayalam" Ph.D. in Linguistics, Awarded by the University of Kerala, 1997.[6]

It's very common for non-linguist native speakers to be swayed by the script and insist that they know certain sounds exist simply because certain letters exist. Given the pronunciation in Hindi of native speakers of Dravidian languages (or at least of Kanada, Telugu, Malayalam and Tamil, which is as far as my experience goes), I would concur with Geetakumary's comment. Interlingua 22:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I've never had any problem with this - I generally pronounce things like ph (as in "phalam"), bh ("bhūmi") as they are meant to be pronounced. However, most people don't bother with the aspiration in casual speech - this is because of our Tamil origins. In Tamil, there is no such thing as aspiration, although a few brahmins probably try to pronounce Sanskrit-derived words correctly. Educated Malayalis are generally able to pronounce these sounds when they actually try,which most almost never do. Some people with rustic upbringings might never have been taught about this, so they probably would not be able to pronounce aspirated stops even if they tried. I suspect that very few people (including me) actually use them in regular speech (as opposed to when reading the Adhyatma Ramayanam aloud, for example), but I don't know if you could say that they are absent from the language. On a related note, most people pronounce "Phalgunan" as "Falgunan" because the same letter is used to write ph as f (probably not because they cannot pronounce ph), but you would think that older people would know better. --172.215.240.230 (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

But there's still the problem of self-reported behavior. I've known many educated Malayalis who also read Sanskrit and speak Hindi and who insist they they can produce aspirated stops, even when, in fact, they cannot. Given both the general difficulty of even multilingual Malayalis (and Telugus and Kanadigas) to produce such sounds and their own self-perception that they can easily produce these sounds, I'm very skeptical that aspirated stops exist as phonemes in any of the major Dravidian languages. This is not a criticism of the speakers nor of the language. Rather, this is an observation about the phonemic inventory of Malayalam (and other Dravidian languages). Again, I'd like to repeat my request for linguistic citations from peer-reviewed journals and books on this topic. The one that I've found clearly states that aspirated stops do NOT exist in Malayalam. Interlingua 23:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, but if you listen to some recordings or watch malayalam videos on youtube (particularly songs, because singers are more careful about their pronunciation), I'm sure you'll hear plenty of aspirated consonants. Try this one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a7PI6jXD74. I think the problem originates in language teaching - proper pronunciation of aspirates in Hindi is simply not emphasized in the classroom, so malayalis tend to be lax about it as they are in their own language. It will be very hard to find unbiased (as malayalis wouldn't actually admit to not being able to aspirate consonants) linguistic citations for this, but I'll try. --Kannan91 (talk) 16:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Categories

Why is this article in Tamil Nadu-related categories, and no Kerala-related ones? This seems rather ridiculous. --Kannan91 (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I've regrouped it under WP:KERALA now. --thunderboltz^(TALK) 20:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Citations needed?

Apparently, a lot of citations are required for the "words derived from Sanskrit" section, but it is all obviously true if you think about it. --Kannan91 (talk) 18:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Karintamil (3100 BCE - 100 BCE)

Can any one add some information of Malayalam literature works of Karintamil (3100 BCE - 100 BCE) period? We need some citation here. --V4vijayakumar (talk) 14:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Untitled

Malayalam is a recognised classical language of GOI, and necessary condition that the language should meet atleast 1500years old. Where the Middle Tamil is only from 8th century and committee from Kerala clearly and explicitly proved before the Classical language committee of GOI Malayalam os older than 1500. Those reports are available in Malayalam language in public domain. The evidence put forth before the Committee is the Pulima komb hero stone inscription from second century BC. Add those infos to the Malayalam language Wikipedia page for complete picture on the origin of Malayalam language.

Malayalam language materials

https://archive.org/details/ldpd_8661431_000

https://archive.org/details/malayalamenglish01gund

https://archive.org/details/lukemalayalamara00madr

Rajmaan (talk) 00:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

ഞാൻ Arun vijayan gurunathanmannu (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Additional info requested

Could someone please include whether Malayalam is left-to-right or right-to-left in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.170.43.216 (talk) 06:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Go to the section on its writing system. Then follow the link to the article about it, where it can be found under "Characteristics" and in the infobox. --JorisvS (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Malabar Language

The language of Malabar was not Malayalam. Malayalam came into Malabar only with the arrival of converted to Christianity, non-brahmanial populations from Travancore. The language of Malabar had absolutely different words, most of which cannot be understood by Malayalam speakers of Travancore.

Words like: ബരത്തം, ചെരയിക്കുക, ബസ്സി, പക്കിണ്, ബെയ്ക്ക്, കീയ്, ബയ്യാപ്പുറം,and hundreds of other words are un-understandable to the Malayalam speakers of Travancore.

As of now, the traditional language of Malabar has been wiped out by formal education, Malayalam films and TV serials and by Malayalam Newspapers.

More on this can be found on this link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.1.154.172 (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

This is indeed a very bold claim. Why is this not reflected in the writings of mediaeval-era Malabari authors such as Cherusherry, Poonthanam or Ezhuthachan? All of them wrote in a form of Malayalam very similar to the present one. Indielov (talk) 16:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

NO THAT IS NOT TRUE THE NORTH MALABARI SLANG EVOLVED WITH THE MIXTURE OF SEVERAL LANGUAGES FROM KASARGOD LIKE KANNADA,TULU, KONKANI,URDU,ARABIC,MARATHI,HINDI ETC.... LETS NOT START A FIGHT TO PROOVE WHICH DISTRICT SPEAKS PURE MALAYALAM..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARAVIND NAMBOOTHIRI (talk • contribs) 11:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Add more information for verbs

This article on Malayalm doesn't have any information on verb conjugations. Can somebody add more information on verbs and verb conjugations? There should be examples also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aparme (talk • contribs) 17:43, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

No evidence of Malayalam in the ancient Sangam period

Not a single Malayalam inscription found in the Sangam period (300 BC- 300AD).

Not a single piece of literature written in Malayalam in the ancient period.

No evidence whatsoever in the ancient historical record of a consciousness of the people of Kerala speaking Malayalam or calling themselves Malayalam.

In contrast, we have multiple ancient Tamil inscriptions from Kerala dating back to 300 BC:

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Tamil-Brahmi-script-found-at-Pattanam-in-Kerala/article14947188.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/history-and-culture/edakal-cave-yields-one-more-tamilbrahmi-inscription/article2872568.ece

We have a large corpus of rich classical Tamil literature from ancient Kerala (Sangam literature and Silappatikaram).

81.152.240.67 (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Speaking Malayalam or The consciousness of being a Malayali can be evolved later but for it was sure that Modern Tamil was also not there in sangam age.Both language subjected to evolution.Opinion should fact based not subjective with personal interest of You language or race Skylark95choppen (talk) 23:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Debates on the origins of Malayalam - June 2017

Removed Krishnamurti. Krishnamurti as cited from Britannica is unreliable for two reasons. One, he is NOT an established expert on Malayalam - with no publications specifically on Malayalam linguistics. Two, more importantly, in the Britannica entry - the language tree depicted in the same article clearly shows the split of Malayalam before the development of Tamil. Thus, Krishnamurti contradicts himself in the entry. I have removed this reference. If other editors want to use this entry to give timelines, they must first explain this contradiction.

Krishnamurti, Karashima and Mahapatra are general historians of South India - none specialising in Kerala/Malayalam. I fail to see how their view can be accepted over specialist linguisticians of Malayalam such as Govindankutty and Asher & Kumari. It only exhibits the authors' own biases.

Asher and Kumari (1997) give a basic treatment of the linguistic history. However, their conclusion is clear. That the split is in ancient era, before the development of Tamil. Detailed discussions can be elaborated in the Evolution section, however the current position is that of Asher and Kumari’s. A more authoritative newer source needs to be provided to claim a counter conclusion.Hyper9 (talk) 15:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The only bias here appears to be your own. Your first edit basically removed the Britannica reference claiming that Bhadriraju Krishnamurti is unreliable. Your next edit reintroduces him along with some OR to suit your own narrative. Krishnamurti does not contradict himself. He is simply presenting both sides of the Malayalam-origin debate as evident here: Malayalam evolved either from a western dialect of Tamil or from the branch of Proto-Dravidian from which modern Tamil also evolved. This is the position outlined in the article. Asher and Kumari also begin, The most widely held view is perhaps the one that takes Malayalam as a 'daughter' of Tamil, the historical records of which go back to the pre-Christian era. All your claims of certain authors being general historians and not Malayalam-specialists are specious and contradicted by your own edits. If you want to bolster the Proto-Dravidian theory, then please do so without removing the "most widely held view" or its primacy. If you want to bolster the "daughter of Tamil" theory, then do that without impinging on any of the Proto-Dravidian stuff. Just maintain NPOV and avoid OR statements such as "The current scholarly understanding" unless reliable sources actually state so and are not contradicted elsewhere (as is the case here).--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 16:29, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: The Krishnamurti reference was pre-existing on Wiki and I was not the one to introduce/change it, much like several other dubious links that you often highlight. Krishnamurti's Dravidian languages entry on Britannica (which is the one used for citation) is certainly contradictory - but what you quote above, to defend Krishnamurti, is now magically from the Malayalam entry which is NOT the one cited on the page! Perhaps, you need to add this link first before arguing about the legibility of the link.

Asher and Kumari are fairly clear that they have been 'convinced' of pre-historic split. And this is taken as the current view on the topic. The debate on the topic is recognised and it is elaborated in the 'Evolution' section. However, the conclusion of the debate, as I point out in the parent 'Talk' comment, is that of Asher and Kumari's (aka current scholarly understanding!!). This is precisely what is summarised in the Introduction, so Im not sure what is this bias that you imagine I have. In fact, I'm not sure why you (Cpt.a.haddock) are imposing your own bias in the face of such an expert verdict! Kindly explain why you would disagree with their verdict - with the appropriate citation!

The academics that have been cited are the best when none other exist. That does not mean that they are the best in every way. If you find a better source, I would welcome it but you never seem to provide one.Im not getting involved in Proto-Dravidian/Indo-Aryan theory blah blah blah - but my reading and citations are a fair, dispassionate summary of the expert literature. It appears that you (Cpt.a.haddock) are the one more entangled in this - and trying to push your own POV.Hyper9 (talk) 17:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I would like to also point out that you (Cpt.a.haddock) went and modified the Wiki that had held stable for some time. You did NOT open this Talk section to discuss and arrive at a Consensus before modifying the section - I had to after your modification spree. And now you are accusing me of doing the same. Perhaps you need to re-evaluate your own POVs and biases on this topic. If you have launched into this after my comment on the Chera Talk that there are POVs in the article, then I must point out to you that you have mistaken the size of the POVs (which are very minor and used only for their minor explanatory power). It is nothing of this magnitude !!Hyper9 (talk) 17:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hyper9: Asher and Kumari do not magically become "current scholarly understanding" just because you say so. They are one reliable source and proponents of one theory. There are others who are proponents of another theory which appears to be the more widely accepted one (in Asher and Kumari's own words). We are simply here to present both without bias. As for article stability, looking at the history there used to be some semblance of balance to this article until a couple of months ago. There have been a series of IP edits removing the Tamil angle from the article. This includes edits by 115.99.16.157 on April 15 where he removed content from the lead (in his first edit), followed a few hours later by a manual revert by your good self where you deign to not bother reintroducing the same content. As to why I'm here, I'm here because of your use of Asher and Kumari as a basis for your synthesis in Chera dynasty and I noticed similar NPOV issues when I checked here. I don't usually bother with non-history related articles.

Setting all that aside, what are your issues with the current position in the Evolution section? We can work on that here and attempt to reach a consensus. I don't share your opinion that Asher and Kumari's position somehow represents "current scholarly understanding" or that the other sources cited in the section are unreliable. The only author who could be questionable is Dr. BP Mahapatra who is apparently "Deputy Registrar General (languages)", a Census bureau official of unknown qualifications/expertise; he is however only one of four authors in the book's byline and the Google Books preview does not provide information on who wrote the Malayalam chapter.

And if there are any lurkers watching on, please jump in to provide a third opinion.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 18:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: - Ok. Let me break this down for you. Asher and Kumari (1997) are authorities on Malayalam. Their current position on this issue is that the split is pre-Sangam. There is also no subsequent contrary evidence of a similar quality presented - make note, since 1997 if not 1972! Therefore, they become the 'current understanding'. You do not present any single similarly authoritative (expert in malayalam linguistics) reference to defend your position, yet you argue against it! What is that but a pre-conceived bias? The debates that you talk about are acknowledged and dutifully recorded in detail later in main body, Evolution or other sections. But the conclusion of the debate, as it stands, is that of Asher's. As I mentioned earlier, please defend your argument with the appropriate (ie subsequent/current) citation from a similar expert in Malayalam linguistics!

Since I add genuine, good quality content on Wikipedia, I am not active all the time and do not monitor all aspects of these pages. The areas which I deem critical, I keep an eye on - and add/improve content if I find it but am not bothered if someone changes/improves any and every aspect. You (Cpt.a.haddock) have distinctly taken to editing both 'Chera' and 'Malayalam' after a casual chat with me on the Chera talk and I'm very aware of this. But your identification of the POVs are incorrect and you can contact me if you need help in finding them. The material and positions that I have provided on these Wikis are well researched and rock solid - and therefore very defendable by me or anyone. On the other hand, you have neither given any expert references nor added any signficant new ideas or research.

I had given a more referenced version of the Evolution but in the haste of your biased view, you have reverted it. All I have been saying, consistently, is that the verdict of the debate within linguistics (as of 2017) is clear - it is that of Govindankutty and Asher & Kumari's. Until someone strongly contests it, this position stands. Asher and Kumari do not arrive at this position themselves but are actually confirming that the analysis of Govindankutty in 1972 is impeccable. Other articles or references that are cited on this page are not original research but just users of secondary data. We (or anyone) can always add more detail to the Evolution section and in fact Mahapatra (eds) turns out to be an excellent resource for that.Hyper9 (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC) Reverted POV edits of as no response forthcoming.Hyper9 (talk) 22:11, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

That's some serious logic you have going there. No, that's not how academia works. Govindankutty Menon's theory has had about 45 years to be accepted by other scholars and clearly, this hasn't happened (remotely) universally as evident from both Krishnamurti and Karashima. In fact, in Krishnamurti's The Dravidian Languages (Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 22), he liberally cites Asher and Kumari (1997) and yet maintains that Malayalam was a "west-coast dialect of Tamil till about the ninth century AD". In The Dravidian Languages (Routledge, 1998, p. 6), Sanford B. Steever states that "Between 800 and 1200 CE the western dialects of Tamil, geographically separated from the others by the Western Ghats, developed into Malayalam". It is clearly evident that the western dialect view is the more accepted one and is effectively "current scholarly understanding". Furthermore, the view's widely accepted status is corroborated by Asher and Kumari themselves.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 07:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: Perhaps you (Cpt.a.haddock) need to re-examine your deep seated biases. I dont see how any of these references (Karashima, Krishnamurti and now Seever) are experts in Malayalam. Repeating from the earlier response - As I mentioned earlier, please defend your argument with the appropriate (ie subsequent/current) citation from a similar expert in Malayalam linguistics!. My open challenge for the relevant citation from an expert in Malayalam still stands. Asher and Kumari's book is not an exposition on the topic of Malayalam's history and hence is not required to be used for that. But the fact that they are being cited means that they are considered the authorities in Malayalam by these generalist historians or linguists.Hyper9 (talk) 07:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hyper9: No, Wikipedia does not require such jaundiced interpretations of who is considered an expert and who is not. These are all reliable linguists and historians published by reliable publishers and are eminently suitable for this NPOV encyclopaedia.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 08:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock:I am sure that every entry in Wikipedia benefits from citations from the foremost authority in the field. And in this case, you fail to show any citation by an authority (in Malayalam-specific linguistics - for this Malayalam wiki page) greater than Govindankutty/Asher and Kumari that I have used. In fact, you point out how others have used these references as authorities without realising the irony in that. I do not think that this (ie using references that support your biases/POVs over the established authority in the field) would acceptable practice anywhere, not just Wikipedia. Hyper9 (talk) 08:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Are there any details on the timelines involved in building consensus, especially waiting for replies ? It is not clear anywhere on Wikipedia and therefore I went ahead with the edits.Hyper9 (talk) 08:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

For the record and benefit of other editors/users interested, I would like to cement the fact that the sources cited by User - Cpt.a.haddock to defend his position are experts of other Dravidian languages - NOT Malayalam. Krishnamurti (of Telugu), Karashima (of Chola-Tamil) and Steever (of Tamil-Kannada). They do not seem to have any significant contributions vis-a-vis Malayalam, as evidenced by the majority of their bodies of work.Hyper9 (talk) 10:59, 16 June 2017 (UTC) In fact, let me add that one would struggle to find ANY contribution to Malayalam by these scholars.

@Hyper9: And to repeat myself, if they were the foremost authority in the field, then everybody would now—45 years after Menon's paper was published—be parroting their theory. That's obviously not the case here.

I'm unaware of fixed timelines for consensus, but in my experience, editors assume good faith and generally tend to wait at least a couple of days for a response. If consensus cannot be reached, then other steps can be taken.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 13:10, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: It does not appear that you're differentiating between the various fields under study here. As you have mentioned ealier, you do not know about Malayalam or Languages and largely edit history pages. This conclusion that we have been discussing has been provided within Linguistics - as given by my references - and is currently undisputed. The Historian, however, has to arrive at a conclusion based on a number of different subjects such as Archaeology, Numismatics, Literature, Linguistics etc - and be able to string a theory to explain all these together.

Also, unlike your claim, it is not necessary for "everybody" to know about all discoveries in any field and some people are not interested in going around "parroting" their pet theories. That does not constitute why a theory becomes the correct one. A theory is accepted when there is academic consensus "within that field" that the theory is impeccable. And Asher and Kumari (as experts of Malayalam linguistics) constitute an authoritative acceptance of Govindankutty's position.

All said and done, your inability to provide any counter references and substantiate why your references should hold for Malayalam have not been responded to. There is also no other contributor/editor willing to provide more insight into this. In which case, I think there is little further to discuss!! Hyper9 (talk) 14:04, 1-6 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is simply utter tosh. Please follow the steps for dispute resolution to request either formal or informal mediation on this issue in your own words and let's be done with it. If you would like me to open this request, let me know.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 14:15, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry but this is the most ridiculous response I've heard on WP, by another WP editor. Even in the face of continued proof, you are unwilling to change to your biases and move ahead and accept the references. Calling my clear case, 'tosh', just shows in plain sight that you never had a NPOV to begin with.Hyper9 (talk) 14:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I do not see any reason to open a case for this - as it was clear cut from the beginning. If you, after going over the evidence/discussion again, believe that you need to win a dispute just to insert your POVs, then please go ahead and open this mechanism. If it is a fair and unbiased mechanism, I really dont have any issue in taking part in it.Hyper9 (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

That was diplomatically done. I've opened a discussion here. Good luck.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:45, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: - I will take a look at the details of this mechanism and respond to it shortly. 2 requests to you. One, Including who is Editor1 and Editor2 makes the parties clear. Two, making the areas where you summarise my positions should be differentiated from your own so that I can correct/verify them. Thanks. Good luck to you too.Hyper9 (talk) 13:03, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

No attempt made by editor (Cpt.a.haddock) to address any of the concerns raised by me in the previous post.Hyper9 (talk) 17:13, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Additional points given in ongoing dispute case found here (for reference)

• I have found one further scholar who has the expertise to address Govindankutty (1972) and who also agrees with this position (of origins before 800 CE). I extend the argument that none of the other scholars cited (Krishnamurti, Karashima, Steever) have shown the required expertise to address this subject in-depth ie Malayalam. This source is an expert of Tamil-Malayalam and Professor of Linguistics at Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu. This can be considered as a supplementary secondary verification source along with Asher & Kumari (1997). S.V. Shanmugam (1976) - Formation and Development of Malayalam, Indian Literature, Vol. 19, No. 3 (May-June 1976), pp. 5-30

• I would further like to add that the Government of India has already granted Classical language tag to Malayalam in 2013, that was based on an expert case presented to them. This tag requires the language to be least 1500 years old, amongst its various criteria ( Link - http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/Criteria-for-classical-language-status/article16265456.ece). This conclusion directly contradicts the position of all 3 references (ie Krishnamurti, Karashima, Steever) who state that the language splits around 800 CE. This decision was hotly contested, but ultimately accepted by the Government. Hyper9 (talk) 13:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

CONCLUSION (for reference)

The Final version that is agreed upon for this Wikipedia Dispute- "The origin of Malayalam remains a matter of dispute among scholars. One view holds that Malayalam and Modern Tamil are offshoots of Middle Tamil and separated from it sometime after c. 7th century CE. A second view argues for the development of the two languages out of 'Proto-Dravidian' in the prehistoric era. In any event, Tamil is considered Malayalam's closest relative."

References

The details of the dispute and arguments can be viewed in the link above. No academic references have passed muster to support the argument that Malayalam separated from Tamil around the 8th century CE. Neither Bhadriraju Krishnamurti nor Sanford Steever (refer to the arguments presented). Any current, authoritative, scholarly references to support this position would be a welcome addition.Hyper9 (talk) 10:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Further References

I have found another author in support of the early split of Malayalam and Tamil. David Dean Shulman (2016) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Dean_Shulman) is regarded as one of the world’s foremost authorities on the languages of India, he says;

QUOTE: "There has been a tendency among historical linguists to think of Malayalam as having diverged directly from Tamil (the Tamil is spoken from the ancient times in what is today Kerala), perhaps as late as the thirteenth century. But this view is almost certainly wrong. Tamil and Malayalam must have separated from one another at a much earlier stage perhaps around the first millennium AD, as we can see from the several archaic features of Malayalam.” UNQUOTE. From PAGE-6 his book, titled, . Itharaju (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Nonsense. Malayalam was granted classical language status based on Classical Tamil literature written over 2000 years ago. This literature is the common heritage of both Tamil and Malayalam. It proves that Malayalam is derived from Old Tamil, and that it split from Tamil after its composition.

The team responsible for Malayalam classical status confirm this in the following interview: https://youtube/9oLKauDDTH0

80.229.155.49 (talk) 22:43, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

There has been wilful, dishonest misquoting of David Dean Shulman (2016). "Tamil and Malayalam must have separated from one another at a much earlier stage perhaps around the middle of the first millennium AD" He is clear that the split occurred after the composition of the sangam literature. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamil-Biography-David-Shulman/dp/0674059921

It is quite obvious that Malayalam is derived from Old Tamil mixed later with Sanskrit. All the classical literature from Kerala was written in Old Tamil not Sanskrit. Pathitrupathu, Ainkurunuru, Silappatikaram etc were all composed in Kerala not Tamil Nadu.185.69.145.86 (talk) 03:06, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. As a thumb rule, sources who have not exhibited any expertise specifically in Malayalam have not been used for this topic. Shulman's comments are appreciated and add to the current understanding but they are quite broad, and very general by most standards. Hyper9 (talk) 06:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Shulman is well versed in reading not just Tamil, but also Sanskrit and Malayalam. His extended comments on Malayalam being derived from Old Tamil are convincing and quite specific.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fG8NDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=malayalam&f=false

What must be recognised is that Tamil is a diglossic language. Classical Tamil is different from the spoken varieties which were existing at the same time. The west coast dialect of Old Tamil spoken in Kerala 2000 years ago has preserved features which are absent in the East Coast dialect and Classical Tamil. But they were still dialects nonetheless of the same language called 'Tamil' and were mutually intelligible. Tolkappiyam the oldest Tamil literature (possibly written in Kerala) clearly defines Kerala as being part of Tamilakam, and being a Tamil speaking region. As does the Sangam literature from that period. The evidence is overwhelming. 80.229.155.49 (talk) 00:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

In addition even after the time of the first Malayalam inscription in the post Sangam age, the people in Kerala were still using Classical Tamil to write their literature:

http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/history-and-culture/the-earliest-inscription-in-malayalam/article3501408.ece 80.229.155.49 (talk) 01:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Quote from Silappatikaram, the Tamil epic written in Kerala in the post Sangam age:

"There was, again, the learned composer of songs whose knowledge of the Tamil language was complete and known to the whole Tamil land surrounded by the noisy sea." Chapter 3, Lines 36-44.

Surrounded by the sea on three sides and extending up to Vengadam in the north and Kumari in the south was the ancient Tamil land.

It is clear that the word 'Tamil' was used to describe the language of Kerala in the early centuries of the first millennium, and that it was mutually intelligible with the east coast dialect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silappatikaram 80.229.155.49 (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

From Shulman's chapter on Malayalam, quoting the 14th century Kerala grammar book Lila-Tilakam (LT):

Pages 223 -

"Lila-Tilakam presents the reader (in Sanskrit sutras and prose commentary) with a grammatical description of Manipravalam, seen as a distinctive linguistic amalgam of Sanskrit and the local language of Kerala, bhasa, which the author, for historical-cultural reasons, also refers to as "Tamil".

Historically, Tamil was spoken and written in Kerala alongside Sanskrit and early forms of Malayalam. The two languages. Tamil and Malayalam must have separated by the mid-first millennium, but they remained very close in many ways; Tamil literature flourished in Kerala from the beginning - whenever that was - and was always a prestigious component of Kerala culture. What is more, despite the increasing distance between the two linguistic traditions, speakers of proto-Malayalam thought of themselves as speaking Tamil, or a kind of Tamil, well into the late medieval or possibly even early modern times." 80.229.155.49 (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

As per his own CV, David Shulman does not even say that he knows Malayalam, forget about being an expert in it. You can see it here - https://www.academy.ac.il/Index2/Entry.aspx?nodeId=809&entryId=18357. There is no reason to think that his comments on Malayalam are on par with the sources that are already given. The origin of both Malayalam and Tamil are traced back to some form of Proto-Dravidian or Proto-Tamil-Malayalam. The authoritative references are already provided. If you wish to add your own comments to this, then please provide similar sources. And Shulman or any others that you provide, unfortunately, do not come anywhere near for this. You can discuss this here on the Talk page and arrive at a concensus before editing the para on evolution. Thanks. Hyper9 (talk) 08:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

You are in denial. I am not going to waste my time in an edit war with you. My questions to you are the following:

(1) Do you deny that Kerala produced Sangam classics and the Silappatikaram? (2) Do you deny that the team behind Malayalam classical language status used Sangam literature as evidence for Malayalam's antiquity? (3) Do you deny that the Chera dynasty who used Tamil for centuries were based in Kerala? It is quite sad to see Malayalees deny their own classical heritage:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_literature

Sanskrit and Tamil classical literature are something that every Indian should be proud of. 80.229.155.49 (talk) 13:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

There has to be an agreement on semantics before anyone can have a serious discussion on the evolution of Malayalam. 'Tamil' can refer to 3 different stages of the language, 'Old Tamil', 'Middle Tamil' and 'Modern Tamil'.

The difference between a 'language' and 'dialect' must also be defined. In the case of Modern Tamil and Malayalam, it is clear from the ancient literature that the people of Tamilakam (ancient Kerala and Tamil Nadu) regarded themselves as speaking the same language called 'Tamil' which was Old Tamil. This was mutually intelligible despite dialectal differences (East coast vs West coast).

Govindakutty paper only highlights 3 dialectal differences such as varying pronunciations of the initial 'n', the addition of 'u' in East coast Tamil as a second person oblique form, and the preservation of the cluster 'lk' in words such as 'Kolkkai' in the West coast dialect. East coast Tamil has changed the 'lk' into 'rk' e.g. 'Korkai'. It is laughable to claim that this is evidence of a different language called Malayalam in the ancient period. It is evidence of a different dialect for sure and Govindakutty does not claim otherwise. His designation of 'Proto-Tamil-Malayalam' is only correct if you regard the 'Tamil' in that term as 'Modern Tamil'. But we already have a term for that common language given in the classical literature of that period and it is Tamil, now known in the modern era as 'Old Tamil'. 80.229.155.49 (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: perhaps can give some further input. 80.229.155.49 (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Though your questions are interesting, it is fairly obvious that you do not understand why and how Malayalam is connected to Sangam literature. And I can tell you that it is definitely not the way you think it is. Like you, I am not interested in either an edit war or taking any classes for you. And as for your exhortations on Tamil or Sanskrit "pride" or "classical" etc etc - they are frankly irrelevant and only serve to stray away from looking at the topic objectively. The Govindankutty article uses just 3 examples for illustrative purposes, there are probably hundreds. It also clearly states that Malayalam cannot be considered as a derivative of any form of Tamil (Old, Middle or Modern) but that it can only be derived from what is designated as 'Proto-Dravidian' or 'Proto-Tamil-Malayalam' - which is also the source of Tamil. What part of that is not clear??

Most of your points on Malayalam are erroneous and cannot be characterised so easily as you try to do. I am frankly not against any well sourced and clearly researched information but most editors here are often just raging and ranting and providing their own opinions which, like mine, are of little value. Such claims are often supported by weak sources by general historians and linguists which is usually outdated as far as Malayalam is concerned and so there is little point in referring to them. If you wish to get answers to questions, you can post them (nicely) on my page but I am not inclined to answer your general and unrelated questions here as many of them are not relevant. Thanks. Hyper9 (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Poem on Chera King Nedumcheralathan from Pathitrupathu:

He was born to King Uthiyan Chēral

and Venmāl clan Queen Nallini.

He is a king with great fame,

faultless, honest words and sweet drums.

He carved a bow symbol on the Himalayas

with waterfalls,

ruled splendidly with a just scepter,

the entire Thamilakam

with loud oceans as fences.

Aryan kings with esteemed greatness,

great fame and tradition, bowed to him.

He captured the unkind, harsh-mouthed

Greeks, tied their hands in the back,

poured oil on their heads, and seized their

precious, expensive jewels and diamonds.

After his great victories,

he gifted old towns and helped others,

ruined enemy kings with whom he had discord,

a fear-instilling man with great effort.

80.229.155.49 (talk) 00:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Nice poem - With probably a lot of exaggerations. Is this poem your proof for something? If so, please make it clear what you want to say. In any case, I don't see what is your problem with the Wikipedia entry. Both competing theories on Malayalam have been provided space. In fact, I'll point out that the 7th century theory does not have any Malayalam expert's backing, but is often part of the mis-characterisations by Tamil experts who seem to know very little Malayalam. Also, If you wish to discuss Chera dynasty then you can discuss it on the relevant pages. Cheers. Hyper9 (talk) 08:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock:, (Hyper9) has distorted the work of S.V. Shanmugam (1976). It does NOT support the fringe view that Malayalam was a separate language from Tamil in the ancient period. In fact, Shanmugam clearly suggests that the idea that Malayalam originated independently from Proto-Dravidian is untenable:

"Kerala during the Sangam age formed part of a larger linguistic area called Tamilakam, 'the Tamil speaking region'...Many Tamil poets hailed from this area. Poets like Kapilar, Paranar, Kappiyanar were from the Kerala part of ancient Tamilakam. One of the Sangam works, Pattirupattu was written eulogizing the Chera kings who were the rulers of one part of the Kerala country. Another Sangam work Ainkurunuru, an anthology, was collected and edited in response to an order from one of the Chera kings. The grammatical treatise, Tolkappiyam, which is the earliest extant literary composition in Tamil, is considered to have been have written by a scholar who belonged to the southern-most part of the Kerala coast. So, there is no doubt that the language of literature was Centamil, 'standard Tamil', in Kerala at the time."

"a slightly different dialect, preserving some archaic features not found in any of the literary works of Tamil, must have been vogue in Kerala at the time. Ramaswami Ayyar refers to these features as 'archaisms preserved in the West-coast colloquials'."

"Nevertheless, many changes, which have taken place in the historical period of Tamil, had occurred in Malayalam also. As already noted, only these changes are responsible for Ramaswami Ayyar to say that Malayalam separated from Tamil in the Early Middle Tamil period. Thus, it seems quite certain that the evolution of Malayalam cannot be explained by a tree diagram, i.e. split process alone."

"Yet, some scholars of Malayalam still believe that Malayalam should have originated independently from the Proto-Dravidian at a very early stage. Despite Ramaswami Ayyar's exposition of the untenability of this theory as early as 1936, a few Malayalam scholars cling to it, their sole support being the presence of some archaisms in the language."

"From what has been said so far, it can be safely concluded that Centamil, 'standard Tamil' , was used as the language of literature in the West coast during Sangam period. Although the exact nature of the colloquial speech is not known, it can be nevertheless assumed that a form of speech, which can be designated as Proto-Malayalam was prevalent in the region. This speech from must have been an autochthonous language which should have functioned as a creole as defined by Stewart."

S.V. Shanmugam (1976) - Formation and Development of Malayalam, Indian Literature, Vol. 19, No. 3 (May-June 1976), pp. 5-30.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24157306.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Nagadeepa (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

There is no misquoting, as Shanmugam provides a discussion on the issue and then provides a clear conclusion. Only the conclusion is used. Also, the other point he is making is that the relationship between the languages is complex over time, not a simple tree diagram. But that is not the same as saying that the languages are not existing independently. In fact, by selecting parts of his discussion that suit you, you wilfully ignore his final conclusion of the presence of spoken Malayalam around 5th century AD (ie his dating of Sangam literature). If there is any contribution that needs to be made, you can summarise them and add them to the page but there is no need to copy-paste the entire paper here. Also, both views had been listed in a neutral language. Why has this been tampered without any sources or basis? Please feel free to discuss before editing these sections. Hyper9 (talk) 01:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

It is abundantly clear from Shanmugam's article that Proto-Malayalam was not an independent language from Old Tamil, but another spoken dialect which had retained many archaic features not found in the oldest written forms of Tamil. He is clear that Kerala was a Tamil speaking region in the ancient period. He is also clear that the theory that Malayalam is not primarily derived from Old Tamil is untenable. I will request a dispute resolution/3rd party because you are clearly misrepresenting the evidence.Nagadeepa (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

"you wilfully ignore his final conclusion of the presence of spoken Malayalam around 5th century AD." Shanmugam does not say that anywhere in his article. Stop distorting his words. Please use verbatim quotes from the article in your arguments. Shanmugam clearly states that Proto-Malayalam was spoken in the Sangam age. That is not the same as modern Malayalam. That is not the same as a completely independent language from Old Tamil. Shanmugam has also covered the great contribution Kerala has made to ancient Tamil literature (which you have deleted because it exposes your fringe view). The ancient literature of Kerala refers to 'Tamil' being spoken in the common region of Tamilakam.Nagadeepa (talk) 03:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Hyper9: I have opened up a dispute resolution, good luck.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Malayalam

Nagadeepa (talk) 13:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Ramaswami Ayyar - The Evolution of Malayalam Morphology, 1936 Cochin government press - a whole book by a Malayalam linguistic expert on the evolution of the language is forthright on the widely held assertion that Malayalam is derived from Middle Tamil:

P138-141 : As already pointed out above it is with Early Middle Tamil that Malayalam is most intimately related. I have been led to stress the question of affiliations so much here because of the view prevailing among some scholars in Malabar (Kerala) that in point of linguistic kinship, Malayalam stands in relation to Tamil on as much a footing of equality as Kannada or even Telugu.

"Those who maintain that "Malayalam is as much independent of Tamil as Kannada or Telugu" seek support for their view in the following postulates of theirs. It is necessary to examine them here in some detail in view of the vogue obtaining for them among some Malayalam scholars: but I may say at once that some of these postulates (see below for discussion) are wholly untenable, while others are not proved or supported, and further that even if it happens that some of these postulates could be in the future be supported by data which are now not available, one has to remember that these features (appearing as archaisms) are after all so few that they cannot touch anything more than the outermost fringe of the problem of affinities; for, as I have already pointed out above, correspondences and derivative relationships between Malayalam and a stage of speech answering to Early Middle Tamil are so numerous and fundamental that there would be no scientific warrant for any view other than that Malayalam is most intimately allied to stage of speech corresponding to Early Middle Tamil, with a few archaisms peculiar to the west coast".

On the whole, except for a very few archaisms like the inflexional n'in-, the plural imperatives with vin, ppin, and perhaps constructions like ceyyam and ceyyarudu, the features of Malayalam morphology are directly related to, or immediately derivable from a stage of speech corresponding to what may now be described as Early Middle Tamil."

Ramaswami Ayyar conclusively puts Govindakutty's ludicrous theory (based on the meagre evidence of 3 dialectal differences) to rest. The book is available here:

https://archive.org/stream/TheEvolutionOfMalayalamMorphology/The-Evolution-of-Malayalam-Morphology

Nagadeepa (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

The conclusion presented on the WP page is the one after a dispute resolution. There is no need to modify it without discussing it first. All of these additional sources that you have added have been shown to be deficient. That is already present on this Talk page and it appears that you have not read them. I do not think that the same arguments need to be repeated. Not only this but, Caldwell and Ayyar are so outdated that they can be dismissed outright. You have not been able to produce any more recent or authoritative references but are trying to support your theories with these outdated sources. Hyper9 (talk) 19:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

You have already been banned previously for your distortions and unscientific edits. Nothing in your responses has any value and is simply hot air. On one hand you use and distort V.S Shanmugam as an accurate reference. Then on the other hand you malign Ayyar as outdated, when the very same Shanmugam quotes and agrees with Ayyar's findings which have stood the test of time. You have evaded all of my questions and just distort accurate sources. Hopefully 3rd party mediation will put an end to your nonsense.

Nagadeepa (talk) 19:55, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest that if you wish to dispute any content, you ought to discuss the issue in a manner that follows WP:CIVIL. There is no problem for me or any other editor in participating in a discussion if it is carried out in a civil manner. If you would like to do so, please make your points clearly, isolating them clearly from extracts from experts by using quotes or bold. It is only then that there can be any progress on this, as I am still not sure what your exact point is. Hyper9 (talk) 18:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

"I am still not sure what your exact point is."

I genuinely think you are playing dumb. It is really obvious what my points are, and I made them explicitly clear in the dispute resolution noticeboard. I suspect you know that you cannot refute any of my points under 3rd party mediation, hence why you have run away from the discussion. I am very happy to continue the conversation without describing what I genuinely think of you, and to leave the debate to the content and nothing else.

Nagadeepa (talk) 18:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

The Silappadikaram - Translation by V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar, lecturer in Indian history and archaeology, University of Madras, Oxford University Press 1939, Page 346:

"So ends the Silappadikaram...In the manner in which lofty hills are reflected in the mirror, it expresses the essence of the cool Tamil country bounded by the Kumari, Vengadam and the eastern and western seas, in its two quarters of pure and impure Tamil [3] comprising the five regions (tinais) where dwell men and gods devoted to duty and to the common practice of dharma, artha and kama; and it deals in chaste language expressive of good sense in flawless rhythm, with aham (love) and puram (war), and with worthy songs...and other things which were in conformity with established rules of the well known forms of vari, kuravai and sedam couched in perfect and understandable Tamil."

"Translator's Note [3], page 346 : Pure and impure Tamil - Two kinds of Tamil were in vogue."

Nagadeepa (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

You incoherent ramblings do not do any good to your argument, if you are making one ie. I am genuinely unable to see what exactly your point is - as you keep saying something different every time. The wording on the Wikipedia page was made neutral to reflect both theories - and this was the consensus arrived at by two disputing editors. Rather than giving me all these irrelevant points, kindly point out what is it in the page thats so big a problem and what is it about the Shanmugam paper that you think has been interpreted incorrectly. Also, I am giving you ample time and space to discuss this but you are refusing to do so and going and editing the page without any discussion, which is not agreeable. Hyper9 (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

(1) Malayalam is derived from an ancient West Coast dialect of Tamil. The evidence for this is overwhelming in both the linguistic and historical record. It should be made clear in the opening paragraph that this is the widespread view accepted by most scientific scholars. The fringe theory that Malayalam has an older root independent from Tamil is not equatable.

(2) During the ancient period Kerala formed part of a larger linguistic area called Tamilakam, 'The Tamil speaking region'. Much of the extensive ancient Tamil literature was composed in Kerala including Tolkāppiyam, Ainkurunuru, Pathitrupathu and Silappatikaram. There is no doubt that the language of literature in Kerala was Standard Old Tamiḻ (centamiḻ) at the time and this should be mentioned on the page. Internal historical evidence from the said literature clearly shows a Tamil consciousness among the people of Kerala, who saw themselves as speaking Tamil in a Tamil region.

(3) A slightly different spoken colloquial dialect, preserving some archaic features not found in any of the literary works of Tamil must have also been present in Kerala at the time. This accounts for the differences which has led some fringe scholars (e.g. Govindakutty) to claim an independent origin. However, this fringe view has been jettisoned by more serious and scientific scholars such as S.V Shanmugam and Ramaswami Ayyar.

(4) All of the above points I have made are supported by the following reference which has been distorted by you:

S.V. Shanmugam (1976) - Formation and Development of Malayalam, Indian Literature,Vol. 19, No. 3 (May-June 1976)

You have used this above reference to claim an independent origin of Malayalam when in actual fact it supports the mainstream view that Malayalam is largely derived from an ancient form of Tamil.

Nagadeepa (talk) 20:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

"KERALA DURING THE SANGAM AGE FORMED PART OF A LARGER LINGUISTIC AREA CALLED TAMILAKAM, 'THE TAMIL SPEAKING REGION'" S.V. Shanmugam - Formation and Development of Malayalam, Indian Literature,Vol. 19, No. 3 (May-June 1976), Page 7, Section 2.1.

Nagadeepa (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

" Also, I am giving you ample time and space to discuss this but you are refusing to do so".

You are the one who ran away from a mediated discussion on spurious grounds. Are you willing to discuss the points in question under 3rd party mediation?Nagadeepa (talk) 22:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Once again, you do not differentiate between your own views and where you are quoting from an expert. However, I will still try and address the basic source of dispute. Shanmugam (1976) discusses various aspects of the theory for an earlier origin for Malayalam. In contrary to your interpretation of the paper, he is finally agreeing with this 'early' theory. He provides the clearest proof for his conclusion on Page 26 - which you do not appear to have seen. On this page he states clearly that there is an existence of spoken Malayalam when Tamil was used for the purpose of writing the Sangam literature. This is the clearest and simplest form you will see to understand Shanmugam's conclusions.

It is you who has not shown the basic decency when addressing other editors here and not followed WP:CIVIL. I really dont have any problem with having a discussion anywhere as long as you behave appropriately.Hyper9 (talk) 01:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

"On this page he states clearly that there is an existence of spoken Malayalam when Tamil was used for the purpose of writing the Sangam literature." He does not say anything of the sort on page 26. Proto-Malayalam is another dialect of Old Tamil and was mutually intelligible with East Coast Old Tamil. This is why 3rd party mediation is needed as you are constantly distorting the paper. As you have agreed to discuss these points anywhere, I will open another dispute resolution. I will leave the discussion to the points and not mention your personal character or behaviour. Nagadeepa (talk) 11:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Hyper9: Link to active dispute resolution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Malayalam Nagadeepa (talk) 12:11, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

"Once again, you do not differentiate between your own views and where you are quoting from an expert."

I will repeat the verbatim statement of fact by S.V.Shanmugam (NOT me). He is not debating this, he is not quoting this, he is stating it factually himself.

"KERALA DURING THE SANGAM AGE FORMED PART OF A LARGER LINGUISTIC AREA CALLED TAMILAKAM, 'THE TAMIL SPEAKING REGION'" S.V. Shanmugam - Formation and Development of Malayalam, Indian Literature,Vol. 19, No. 3 (May-June 1976), Page 7, Section 2.1.

You should remove S.V. Shanmugam as your reference for the false theory of Malayalam having an independent origin from Tamil.

Nagadeepa (talk) 23:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Quote from Professor Sreedhara Menon, Kerala's foremost historian:

"THE SANGAM AGE IS THE FIRST WELL-LIGHTED EPOCH IN THE HISTORY OF SOUTH INDIA. DURING THIS PERIOD KERALA WAS PART OF TAMILAKAM AND SHARED A COMMON HISTORY AND HERITAGE WITH THE TAMILS" Sreedhara Menon (2011) - Kerala History and its Makers, Page 20.

https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Kerala_History_and_its_Makers.html?id=p_8XnQEACAAJ

Nagadeepa (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

=

I honestly can't believe that you do not see the deficiency of your own argument. Neither of the quotes that you highlight in the colour Red mention anything about Malayalam. The discussion of Kerala and Tamilakam is a separate discussion on political structures. Here, the focus is purely on the nature of the language, Malayalam. And neither of your quotes even mention this !!

In fact, Shanmugam (1976) is more careful than you. He does not jump to any quick or easy conclusions anywhere. It is fairly clear that he agrees with Govindankutty (1972) that the only correct root for Malayalam can be Proto-Tamil-Malayalam (or Proto-Dravidian, which he disagres with) and not Tamil. He addresses Govindankutty towards the end of page 8 and extends Govindankutty's argument by giving two more examples in the beginning of page 9. This brings the total of such categories of differences to 5 - there are hundreds of examples within these categories.

Once again, you have gone ahead and edited the page (3rd time) without discussing it first and even when you know that there is an interested editor already present and involved. What is this but basic public misbehaviour? You have already admitted (in the 1st DRN) that Shanmugam (1976) is perhaps the most recent, relevant and authoritative article as far as this issue is concerned, then why remove it from the page altogether. Some biased administrators have acted against in me in the past and some of them managed to get me banned - but even they have not removed references that I have researched and added to Wikipedia as these references have proven to be the best available. Unless you can come up with a more recent, more authoritative reference by an expert in Malayalam (ie who has extensively published specifically on Malayalam), then I think that Shanmugam should remain on the page as an additional source for interested readers. Hyper9 (talk) 10:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

=

I am afraid talking to you does feel like I'm talking to a mad man. You clearly have good command of the English language yet you act like you cannot read. I suspect you are cunningly playing dumb. I am afraid I will have to report you as Robert has suggested.

You have consistently distorted the accurate source by Shanmugam. Your last reply is so wrong on so many levels. Least of all is that Shamugam clearly refers to Tamilakam as a Tamil linguistic region. It is not a political structure (Chera, Chola, Pandya kingdoms were the political units).

Shamugam clearly indicates that Govindakutty's fringe theory is untenable when he quotes Ayyar's work. This is absolutely clear to anyone with basic English who reads that section.

Finally your claim that the 5 dialectal differences between Proto-Malayalam and Old written Tamil can be equated to "hundreds of differences" is your own original research with no evidence. Ayyar clearly states that these "west coast colloquial archaisms" are few compared to the countless similarities between proto malayalam and middle Tamil.

Anyway I have given up trying to get through to you (like the many before me) and will have to report you. I am not happy that it had to come to this.

Nagadeepa (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

It was fairly obvious that you were never interested in a discussion right from the start of your edits on February 8. Knowing that you would lose the argument, you started trying all sorts of tactics like filing the DRN from February 9th-10th itself to get WP admins to take actions against me.

It is clear that you are selectively choosing portions of the Shanmugam paper to support your own views and modify the content on the page. Shanmugam's conclusion on page 26 should rest any doubts that anyone has about what Shanmugam is implying - that there has to be a presence of spoken Malayalam at the time of the composition of the Sangam literature. The challenge is still open. You still cannot show any counter authoritative paper that has the expertise to address Govindankutty or Shanmugam i.e. an expert in Malayalam historical linguistics. You support your own views with other Dravidian linguists who for all practical purposes do not even seem to be literate in Malayalam, forget about being an expert in it. That will not be valid in any field of study. Hyper9 (talk) 08:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

"If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself." - Joesph Goebells

Please show me the exact verbatim quote on page 26 where Shanmugam says there was spoken Malayalam in the Sangam Age. I dare you. I have the article and there is nothing of the sort. Your credibility is in tatters.Nagadeepa (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Anyone who reads p26 of Shanmugam (1976) will know what is the implication. It is given in the form of a simple table. If you still cannot understand what it means then you are simply in denial. In any case, there is still no reason as to why Shanmugam should be removed as a source on that page (as you have done). It was still part of a para that said that there could be two views on this issue.

As for your points on "lies" and "credibility" - once again, I dont think that you understand that WP is about improving the content and is not about the contributors. The experts cited here (all professors of Malayalam-specific historical linguistics) have commented on the topic and I have simply put their articles here. I am not here to build my reputation or credibility and such comments only expose your immature views about dealing with such issues.Hyper9 (talk) 09:42, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Proto-Malayalam is mentioned on page 26. NOT Malayalam. There is a big difference. This is not proof of an independent language called Malayalam in the Sangam period. You have completely misinterpreted the paper. Proto-Malayalam is another dialect of Old Tamil and was mutually intelligible with East Coast Old Tamil. The people of Kerala at the time called their spoken language 'Tamil' as proven by the ancient Tamil literature from the region. Nagadeepa (talk) 23:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Another scientific source from S.V Shanmugam disproving the fringe theory that Malayalam had an independent origin from Tamil:

(1) S.V Shanmugam - Malayalam in Dravidian (1985), Published by University of Madras. - Quote from Page 6 "There is another set of common innovations which took place in the historic period of Tamil and is found in the early records of Malayalam. These are important as they show that both the languages were linguistically united in the early Christian era."

His work is without the doubt the most up to date on the evolution of Malayalam.

Nagadeepa (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The page makes it clear that there is an early form of Malayalam being spoken at the time of writing Sangam literature. Going by your argument, then Centamil and Old Tamil are NOT Tamil either - and you should stop conflating them also. Shanmugam has repeatedly said that their connections are not straightforward and is one that is characterised by complex interactions of the two languages over time. How is your new source any different? Besides, you still have not answered my earlier question - In any case, there is still no reason as to why Shanmugam should be removed as a source on that page (as you have done). It was still part of a para that said that there could be two views on this issue. Hyper9 (talk) 18:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The disputing editor has admitted several times over the course of the discussion that they are unable to find any better sources than the ones already listed on the page. Both Asher-Kumari and Shanmugam are used to support the para that there are two contrary views on this issue and that both views are well known in the mainstream. Both of them are also Malayalam-specific linguists which makes them the foremost experts on the topic of the page ie Malayalam. As I have mentioned earlier, additional sources and references are always welcome. No reasons provided by the other disputing editor on why Shanmugam should be removed for any WP readers who are interested in this topic. Hyper9 (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

^{I dont understand so many immature and non serious comments from many users with expansionists motives trying to claim superiority of tamil over other languages. This needs to stop. Malayalam as a language is not being granted due respect and being ridiculed by many users as some spinoff of tamil. This is not right and not NPOV either. Why not just let malayalam as a language be? There is not enough emphasis on the importance of inscriptions like Vazhapalli inscriptions which demonstrates the importance of malayalam in kerala. If we go back way too far we will only reach chimoanzees and amoeba to single celled organisms. Which language did they speak eh ? Let us just focus on things that are within reach.} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.117.237.4 (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Were not all these discussions already conducted in the Indian parliament itself, and a conclusion reached that Malayalam is indeed an independent language, which is classical? Previous versions of Malayalam and the language presently called Tamil are both called Tamil. That does not meanthat they are the same language, but are from the same origin. The language Malayala-Thamizh gradually began to be called Malayalam, while the language Pandi-Thamizh gradually began to be called Tamil. Both the peoples historically called their language Tamil. That does not make one a derivative of the other. 12.246.51.130 (talk) 22:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Pronunciation

@CheeseBuffet: Thank you for the explanatory edit summary as well as the link to the earlier discussion. However, your use of /maləjaːɭəm/ is not mentioned in the linked discussion and Wiktionary equates /a/ with /æ/. This makes /maləjaːɭəm/ equivalent to /mæləjaːɭəm/ which is more or less equivalent to the sourced /mæləˈjɑːləm/. I don't think the sourced pronunciation is too bad bar for the second /l/ (which could well be a regional thing). IMO, we should get rid of the unsourced pronunciation altogether and include this audio pronunciation instead. The speaker does sound like a native even if the pronunciation does not exactly match any of the IPA candidates being considered :) Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 12:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: Excuse the late reply. As you said, the English pronunciation (/mæləˈjɑːləm/) seems fine. My edits were on the native, unsourced, pronunciation ([mɐləjaːɭəm]) changing [ɐ] to [a] since the occurrence of [ɐ] is questionable. Even though I'd like to have an IPA pronunciation in the article adding an audio sample would be useful, especially in the lead. It's also a bit strange that there are pronunciations in both languages in the lead without marking which is which. CheeseBuffet (talk) 08:28, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Vowels

Austronesier, the Malayalam pronunciation was recently changed from [ə] to [ʌ] but neither is listed on the linked help page, Help:IPA/Malayalam. [ə] is listed in the Vowels section on this page though. Do you know how to harmonize these? – Thjarkur (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Þjarkur: I have not yet checked all sources yet, especially about the realization of short /a/ (check also note 6 in the key). I have found both [ʌ] and [a] as phonetic notations, but [ə] is clearly out of place. So [mʌlʌjaːɭʌm] is defintely better than [mələjaːɭəm]. Btw, note that the key is completely unsourced. –Austronesier (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Do we need to revisit the classification of malayalam ?

The current malayalam is officially a classical language. Its current form has around 80% vocabulary based on sanskrit along sith the grammatical formation of words like 'sandhis' based on sanskrit style.

It also encapsulates tamil vocabulary pretty well.

The current form of malayalam has two versions based on both tamil as well as sanskrit.

Now should malayalam in its current state be classified differently ?

Instead of just being classified as a simple derivative of tamil should it be correctly classified in the broader sense with multiple influence it has ?

I hope a open minded and fair discussion ensues this section.

Please contribute to this section with your thoughts and understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4071:2317:B2C1:0:0:511:68A4 (talk) 06:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

By this logic, should English be called a Romance language because it has umpteen French and Latin loanwords? A Dravidian language, regardless of what influenced it later on, is a Dravidian language. Its origin does not change. In any case, 'we' are nobody to decide which family of languages Malayalam belongs to. It is against Wiki policy to do original research and 100% of authoritative sources assert that Malayalam is a Dravidian language. Indielov (talk) 05:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

The article is being vandalised to suit Tamil interest.The information provided is poor grammatically and fact wise.proof submitted are negligible. Skylark95choppen (talk) 23:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Personal comments on Wikipedia on Emotion.

There are a statements of personal expression which is unsuitable in Wikipedia content.History of Malayalam page should be rewrite.Current Information is nothing irregular and structureless statement. Littleskylark95 (talk) 18:10, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Article being vandalised modified to suit tamil interests and origin

Can we please revert back the article to a former self which is neutral ? Currently the article is being modified to establish malayalam as a derivative of tamil despite most of the theories being faux and malayalam being entitled and classified as a classical language by government of india. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.117.237.4 (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes indeed!The article has been vandalised and subjected to the personal opinion of Linguistic Chauvanists. Skylark95choppen (talk) 23:05, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

YES THIS MUST BE STOPPED...IT IS NOT NEUTRAL....MALAYALAM DID NOT ORIGINATE FROM TAMIL INSTEAD IT IS MORE LIKE A HIGHLY SANSKRITISED SISTER OF TAMIL.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARAVIND NAMBOOTHIRI (talk • contribs) 11:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Malayalam classification should include contributions from sanskrit too which is massive and heavy. In grammar and vocabulary.

The classification is old and improper. It only covers a partial aspect of malayalam. Malayalam also evolved and took in a lot of sanskrit vocabulary and have sanskrit grammar like sandhis. Why is then malayalam not properly categorised with handful of both proto dravidian and sanskrit roots ?

Yes indeed we have to.Sanskrit has been neglected and there had been a panned interest to suit with Tamil interest by some Linguistic Chauvanists Skylark95choppen (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I could not agree with the concept you called Good faith edits.Vested Intrests in including misinformation in an article are not to be neglected.More over some of the sections are not even have proper citations.How an article remains neutral us upto the information it contains.This Information would hold different views and Opinion.Tamil - A Biography by David Dean Schulman is not the only resource and What is the purpose solely Exxaggeration the role of Tamil Language in an article about Malayalam.Good faith edits by so call editors would not serve the purpose of creating a constructive working atmosphere.Hope you would mimd that. Skylark95choppen (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Malayalam classification should include contributions from sanskrit too which is massive and heavy. In grammar and vocabulary.

The classification is old and improper. It only covers a partial aspect of malayalam. Malayalam also evolved and took in a lot of sanskrit vocabulary and have sanskrit grammar like sandhis. Why is then malayalam not properly categorised with handful of both proto dravidian and sanskrit roots ?

The classification of Malayalam has not been changed. Please provide reliable sources for your claim, which directly supports your suggestion.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 12:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Your opinion is not supporting and the proof you submitted is not enough.The classification indeed improper and reference is only made on resources about Tamil not in In Malayalam or Sanskrit.It proves vested interest of some contributors to twist facts with unimportant arguments Skylark95choppen (talk) 23:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism of the Article

A wider range of Vandalism of the Article is observed with sidline the Different opinions and Project the sole intrest of some group.The Partiality could damage the Equilibrium of the article Skylark95choppen (talk) 06:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Skylark95choppen: Please specify what you mean by vandalism here. You should also be aware that not every problematic edit represents "vandalism" (see WP:NOTVANDALISM). Calling good faith edits by other editors "vandalism" usually will not create a constructive working atmosphere. –Austronesier (talk) 07:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic content

@Yaakohv: Please stop adding undiscussed content when other editors disagree. Statements like "It is a perfect blend of Aryan and Dravidian languages that's why it is musical to the ears" are unencyclopedic and not supported by the source which you have added. Or another one: "These specialties give Malayalis phonological flexibility". ThaThinThaKiThaTha's reverts are fully justified. –Austronesier (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

"Dialects section"

I found this section to be improperly sourced throughout the whole text. There are some ethnologue web references, apparently behind paywall, which should be replaced with linguistic sources. There is also a lot of caste based content in that section, which should be cross checked immediately.ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 07:38, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

You can have a glimpse at the 2019 version (soft paywall then) here[7]. Communal variants (including caste-based ones) are certainly interesting, but the section title should be changed accordingly (something like "regional and communal variants"). As a default source, Ethnologue is "ok" (cf. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Languages#Interpreting online sources of data), but yes, better and more in-depth scholarly sources are badly needed. I guess much of the unsourced text contains valid first-hand information, but per WP standards this violates WP:V and needs to be fixed. –Austronesier (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is Sanskrit neglected in the article?

Malayalam is assumed to be a descendant of Manipravalam which in turn has it's origins to Middle Tamil (Proto Tamil - Malayalam) and Sanskrit. Sanskrit is not a parent of Malayalam instead it is a major contributor to Malayalam when it comes to it's vocabulary and grammatical rules. In malayalam each word has a Dravidian and a Sanskrit counterpart. This brings the sanskritisation level to roughly 50%, but most of the words are not commonly used. There is nothing written about Sankrit, I had a feeling that the part about Sanskrit may be missed out or may not have strong sources. AARYA SAJAYAN (talk) 15:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

AARYA SAJAYAN, if you have strong reliable sources to support your statement, you can make the necessary changes. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 17:47, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Everything in wikipedia requires reliable sources. You again added rather dubious Malayalam-language sources, which have not been cited by other linguists. Additionally you wrote that Malayalam is a "descendent of Manipravalam", but yet your last provided source in German language says that "Als Maṇipravāḷam gilt im heutigen Kerala gemeinhin jegliche Art von Kunstsprache aus Malayalam (maṇi: Rubin) und Sanskrit (pravāḷam: Koralle).", which roughly means, that Manipravalam is a mixture of Malayalam and Sanskrit. Your own source contradicts your claim here. Your edit behaviour and talk in Malayalam article suggests, that you lack the intention of creating encyclopedic content here and you should look after other articles.ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 06:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Nepalese loan words in Malayalam appeared only in the 19th century

Extended content

NEPALESE IN MALAYALAM Until 19th century the vernacular language of indigenous Dravidian people of Kerala was Malayanma which was devoid of Nepalese words but had few Sanskrit words. Philipose Rambans Bible was the last Malayanma book printed in 1811 AD. After 1815 British missionaries changed policy and started promoting the Grantha Malayalam exclusively used by Nambuthiris and some Nairs, then used by less than 5% of the population. Church Mission Society Kottayam and the British Missionary Benjamin Bailey and German missionary Herman Gundert were instrumental in the promotion of Nepalese colloquial words as Sanskrit. More than 3000 Nepalese words were added to Malayalam, a Dravidian language. The place origin of these words is Ahichatra, capital of ancient from where Kadamba king Mayura Varma brought Aryan Brahmins and Naga warriors to Karnataka and settled them in Tulunad in 345 AD. Banapperumal a Tulu prince from Alupas Kingdom invaded Kerala in 1120 AD with a 350000 strong Nair army. After the invasion of Malik Kafur in 1311 AD all the Tamil Kingdoms cane to an end. The Matriarchal kingdoms which followed after 1340 AD had this Tulu-Nepalese heritage. In the 19th century Malayanma was deliberately mixed with these Nepalese words. The resultant language was popularised as Puthu Malayalam. Nepalese words and Malayalam words 🇳🇵 Abbreviated संक्षिप्त Saṅkṣipta സംക്ഷിപ്‌തമായി 🇳🇵 Abduction अपहरण Apaharaṇa അപഹരണം 🇳🇵 Aborigine आदिवासी Ādivāsī ആദിവാസി 🇳🇵 Acceptance स्वीकृति Svīkr̥ti സ്വീകാരം 🇳🇵 Accidental आकस्मिक Ākasmika ആകസ്‌മികമായ 🇳🇵 Accumulation संचय San̄caya സഞ്ചയം 🇳🇵 Acknowledgement स्वीकार Svīkāra സ്വീകാരം 🇳🇵 Actor अभिनेता Abhinētā അഭിനേതാവ് 🇳🇵 Actress अभिनेत्री Abhinētrī അഭിനേത്രി 🇳🇵 Addressing सम्बोधन Sambōdhana സംബോധനചെയ്യല്‍ 🇳🇵 Adequacy पर्याप्तता Paryāptatā പര്യാപ്‌തത 🇳🇵 Adjective विशेषण Viśēṣaṇa വിശേഷണം 🇳🇵 Admission प्रवेश Pravēśa പ്രവേശനം 🇳🇵 Adore पूजा गर्नु Pūjā garnu പൂജിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Adulteressव्यभिचारिणी Vyabhicāriṇī വ്യഭിചാരിണി 🇳🇵 Adultery व्यभिचार Vyabhicāra വ്യഭിചാരം 🇳🇵 Advent आगमन Āgamana ആഗമനം 🇳🇵 Adventure साहसिक Sāhasika സാഹസിക 🇳🇵 Adversary विरोधी Virōdhī വിരോധി 🇳🇵 Adverse प्रतिकूल Pratikūla പ്രതികൂലമായ 🇳🇵 Advertisement विज्ञापन Vijñāpana വിജ്ഞാപനം 🇳🇵 Affection ममता Mamatā മമത 🇳🇵 Affection स्नेह Snēha സ്‌നേഹം 🇳🇵 Affliction पीडा Pīḍā പീഡ 🇳🇵 Aggression आक्रामकता Ākrāmakatā ആക്രമണം 🇳🇵 Agriculture कृषि Kr̥ṣi കൃഷി 🇳🇵 Aid सहायता Sahāyatā സഹായം 🇳🇵 Allegation आरोप Ārōpa ആരോപണം 🇳🇵 Allow अनुमति Anumati അനുമതി 🇳🇵 Almanac पंचांग Pan̄cāṅga പഞ്ചാംഗം 🇳🇵 Alms भिक्षा Bhikṣā ഭിക്ഷ 🇳🇵 Amazing आश्चर्यजनक Āścaryajanaka ആശ്ചര്യജനകമായ 🇳🇵 Ambrosia अमृत Amr̥ta അമൃതം 🇳🇵 Anarchy अराजकता Arājakatā അരാജകത്വം 🇳🇵 Ancient पुरानो Purānō പുരാണമായ 🇳🇵 Anniversary वार्षिकोत्सव Vārṣikōtsava വാര്‍ഷികോത്സവം 🇳🇵 Annual वार्षिक Vārṣika വാര്‍ഷികമായ 🇳🇵 Anointing अभिषेक गर्दै Abhiṣēka gardai അഭിഷേകംചെയ്യല്‍ 🇳🇵 Answer उत्तर Uttara ഉത്തരം 🇳🇵 Antagonist विरोधी Virōdhī വിരോധി 🇳🇵 Anxiety चिन्ता Cintā ചിന്താകുലത 🇳🇵 Apology माफ Māpha माफी Māphī മാപ്പു 🇳🇵 Appointed नियुक्त Niyukta നിയുക്തമായ 🇳🇵 Appointment नियुक्ति Niyukti നിയുക്തമായ 🇳🇵 Apprehension आशंका Āśaṅkā ആശങ്ക 🇳🇵 Archer धनुर्धारी Dhanurdhārī ധനുര്‍ധാരി 🇳🇵 Argument तर्क Tarka തര്‍ക്കം 🇳🇵 Armour कवच Kavaca കവചം 🇳🇵 Arrangement व्यवस्था Vyavasthā വ്യവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Arrival आगमन Āgamana ആഗമനം 🇳🇵 Arrogance अहंकार Ahaṅkāra അഹങ്കാരം 🇳🇵 Arrogant अहंकारी Ahaṅkārī അഹങ്കാരിയായ 🇳🇵 Art कला Kalā കല 🇳🇵 Article लेख Lēkha ലേഖനം 🇳🇵 Artificial कृत्रिम Kr̥trima കൃത്രിമമായ 🇳🇵 Asking सोध्दै Sōdhdai ചോദ്യം 🇳🇵 Assault आक्रमण Ākramaṇa ആക്രമണം 🇳🇵 Assumption धारणा Dhāraṇā ധാരണ 🇳🇵 Astonishment आश्चर्य Āścarya ആശ്ചര്യം 🇳🇵 Asylum शरण Śaraṇa ശരണാലയം 🇳🇵 Atheist नास्तिक Nāstika നാസ്‌തികന്‍ 🇳🇵 Atom परमाणु Paramāṇu പരമാണു 🇳🇵 Atonement प्रायश्चित Prāyaścita പ്രായശ്ചിത്തം 🇳🇵 Attack आक्रमण Ākramaṇa ആക്രമണം 🇳🇵 Attainment प्राप्ति Prāpti പ്രാപ്‌തി 🇳🇵 Attendant परिचर Paricara പരിചാരകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Attraction आकर्षण Ākarṣaṇa ആകര്‍ഷണം 🇳🇵 Attractive आकर्षक Ākarṣaka ആകര്‍ഷകമായ 🇳🇵 Auspicious शुभ Śubha ശുഭമായ 🇳🇵 Author लेखक Lēkhaka ലേഖകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Authorised अधिकृत Adhikr̥ta അധികൃത 🇳🇵 Authority अधिकार Adhikāra അധികാരം 🇳🇵 Auxiliary सहायक Sahāyaka സഹായകമായ 🇳🇵 Base आधार Ādhāra ആധാരമാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Base आधार Ādhāra ആധാരമാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Basis आधार Ādhāra ആധാരം 🇳🇵 Beam किरण Kiraṇa കിരണം 🇳🇵 Beauty सुन्दरता Sundaratā സുന്ദരി 🇳🇵 Behaviour व्यवहार Vyavahāra വ്യവഹാരം 🇳🇵 Belief विश्वास Viśvāsa വിശ്വാസം 🇳🇵 Believer विश्वासी Viśvāsī വിശ്വാസി 🇳🇵 Beloved प्रिय Priya പ്രിയന്‍ 🇳🇵 Birth जन्म Janma ജന്‍മ 🇳🇵 Blessing आशीर्वाद Āśīrvāda ആശീര്‍വ്വാദം 🇳🇵 Blind अन्धा Andhā അന്ധത 🇳🇵 Bodyguard अंगरक्षक Aṅgarakṣaka അംഗരക്ഷകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Book पुस्तक Pustaka പുസ്‌തകം 🇳🇵 Born जन्म Janma ജന്മം 🇳🇵 Boundary सीमा Sīmā സീമ Tulu: adiru അതിര്‌ 🇳🇵 Brain मस्तिष्क Mastiṣka മസ്‌തിഷ്‌കം 🇳🇵 Branch साखा Sākhā ശാഖ 🇳🇵 Brimstone गन्धक Gandhaka ഗന്ധകം 🇳🇵 Broad विस्तृत Vistr̥ta വിസ്‌തൃതമായ 🇳🇵 Brutality क्रूरता Krūratā ക്രൂരത 🇳🇵 Built निर्मित Nirmita നിര്‍മ്മിതമായ 🇳🇵 Cycle चक्र Cakra ചക്രം 🇳🇵 Curious जिज्ञासु Jijñāsu ജിജ്ഞാസുവായ 🇳🇵 Curiosity जिज्ञासा Jijñāsā ജിജ്ഞാസ 🇳🇵 Cultural सांस्कृतिक Sānskr̥tika സാംസ്‌കാരിക 🇳🇵 Cruelty क्रूरता Krūratā ക്രൂരത 🇳🇵 Criminal आपराधिक Āparādhika അപരാധി 🇳🇵 Crime अपराध Aparādha അപരാധം 🇳🇵 Creator निर्माता Nirmātā നിര്‍മ്മാതാവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Creation सृष्टि Sr̥ṣṭi സൃഷ്ടി 🇳🇵 Courage साहस Sāhasa സാഹസികത 🇳🇵 Country देश Dēśa ദേശം 🇳🇵 Corrupt भ्रष्ट Bhraṣṭa ഭ്രഷ്‌ടമായ 🇳🇵 Coronation राज्याभिषेक Rājyābhiṣēka രാജ്യാഭിഷേകം 🇳🇵 Cooperative सहकारी Sahakārī സഹകരണം 🇳🇵 Coolness शीतलता Śītalatā ശീതളാവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Controversy विवाद Vivāda വിവാദം 🇳🇵 Control नियन्त्रण Niyantraṇa നിയന്ത്രണം 🇳🇵 Contradict विरोधाभास Virōdhābhāsa വിരോധിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Contentment सन्तुष्टि Santuṣṭi സന്തുഷ്‌ടി 🇳🇵 Contempt अवहेलना Avahēlanā അവഹേളനം 🇳🇵 Contemplation चिन्तन Cintana ചിന്തനം 🇳🇵 Contamination संदूषण Sandūṣaṇa ദൂഷണം 🇳🇵 Contaminated दूषित Dūṣita ദുഷിപ്പിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Contact सम्पर्क Samparka സമ്പര്‍ക്കം 🇳🇵 Consumption उपभोग Upabhōga ഉപഭോഗം 🇳🇵 Consumer उपभोक्ता Upabhōktā ഉപഭോക്താവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Construction निर्माण Nirmāṇa നിര്‍മ്മാണം 🇳🇵 Constituent घटक Ghaṭaka ഘടകം 🇳🇵 Consonant व्यंजन Vyan̄jana വ്യഞ്‌ജനാക്ഷരം 🇳🇵 Consecration अभिषेक Abhiṣēka അഭിഷേകം 🇳🇵 Consciousness चेतना Cētanā ചേതന 🇳🇵 Conjunction संयोजन Sanyōjana സംയോജനം 🇳🇵 Conjecture अनुमान Anumāna അനുമാനം 🇳🇵 Conformity अनुरूप Anurūpa ആനുരൂപ്യം 🇳🇵 Conformity अनुरूप Anurūpa അനുരൂപമാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Confident आत्मविश्वास Ātmaviśvāsa ആത്മവിശ്വാസം 🇳🇵 Conferance सम्मेलन Sam'mēlana സമ്മേളനം 🇳🇵 Confection मिठाई Miṭhā'ī മിഠായി 🇳🇵 Condition अवस्था Avasthā അവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Condiment मसाला Masālā മസാല 🇳🇵 Condensation संक्षेपण Saṅkṣēpaṇa സംക്ഷേപം 🇳🇵 Conclusive निर्णायक Nirṇāyaka നിര്‍ണ്ണായകമായ 🇳🇵 Concentration एकाग्रता Ēkāgratā ഏകാഗ്രത 🇳🇵 Conceit अहंकार Ahaṅkāra അഹങ്കാരം 🇳🇵 Compound मिश्रित Miśrita മിശ്രിതം 🇳🇵 Composition रचना Racanā രചന 🇳🇵 Compose रचना Racanā രചന 🇳🇵 Complexity जटिलता Jaṭilatā ജടിലത 🇳🇵 Complete पूर्ण Pūrṇa പൂര്‍ണ്ണമായ 🇳🇵 Complete पूर्ण Pūrṇa പൂര്‍ണ്ണത 🇳🇵 Compilation संकलन Saṅkalana സങ്കലനം 🇳🇵 Compassionate दयालु Dayālu ദയാലുവായ 🇳🇵 Compassion करुणा Karuṇā കരുണ 🇳🇵 Common सामान्य Sāmān'ya സാമാന്യം 🇳🇵 Commonसाधारण Sādhāraṇaസാധാരണമായ 🇳🇵 Committee समिति Samiti സമിതി 🇳🇵 Commitment प्रतिबद्धता Pratibad'dhatā പ്രതിബദ്ധത 🇳🇵 Commerce वाणिज्य Vāṇijya വാണിജ്യം 🇳🇵 Command आदेश Ādēśa ആദേശം 🇳🇵 Combined संयुक्त Sanyukta സംയുക്തം 🇳🇵 Coefficient गुणांक Guṇāṅka ഗുണനസംഖ്യ 🇳🇵 Clearly स्पष्ट Spaṣṭa സ്‌പഷ്‌ടമായി 🇳🇵 Classmate सहपाठी Sahapāṭhī സഹപാഠി 🇳🇵 Clarity स्पष्टता Spaṣṭatā സ്‌പഷ്‌ടത 🇳🇵 Churn मंथन Manthana മന്ഥനി 🇳🇵 Chief minister मुख्यमन्त्री Mukhyamantrī മുഖ്യമന്ത്രി 🇳🇵 Charioteer सारथी Sārathī സാരഥി 🇳🇵 Chariot रथ Ratha രഥം 🇳🇵 Character चरित्र Caritra ചാരിത്യ്രം 🇳🇵 Chapter अध्याय Adhyāya അധ്യായം 🇳🇵 Chairperson अध्यक्ष Adhyakṣa അധ്യക്ഷൻ 🇳🇵 Certificate प्रमाणपत्र Pramāṇapatra പ്രമാണപത്രം 🇳🇵 Certain निश्चित Niścita നിശ്ചിതമായ 🇳🇵 Ceremonial औपचारिक Aupacārika ഔപചാരികമായ 🇳🇵 Centre केन्द्र Kēndra കേന്ദ്രം 🇳🇵 Celibacy ब्रह्मचर्य Brahmacarya ബ്രഹ്മചര്യം 🇳🇵 Celebration उत्सव Utsava ഉത്സവം 🇳🇵 Cause कारण Kāraṇa കാരണം 🇳🇵 Caste जाति Jāti ജാതി 🇳🇵 Capital cityराजधानी Rājadhānī രാജധാനി 🇳🇵 Capacity क्षमता Kṣamatā കാര്യക്ഷമത 🇳🇵 Cancellation रद्द Radda റദ്ദാക്കൽ 🇳🇵 Calmness शान्त Śānta ശാന്തത 🇳🇵 Calamity विपत्ति Vipatti വിപത്ത്‌ 🇳🇵 District जिल्ला Jillā ജില്ല 🇳🇵 Distribution वितरण Vitaraṇa വിതരണം 🇳🇵 Dissolve विघटन Vighaṭana വിഘടനം 🇳🇵 Dissimilar भिन्न Bhinna ഭിന്നമായ 🇳🇵 Dissatisfaction असन्तुष्टि Asantuṣṭi അസന്തുഷ്‌ടി 🇳🇵 Disrespect अनादर Anādara അനാദരവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Disregard उपेक्षा Upēkṣā ഉപേക്ഷ 🇳🇵 Disposition स्वभाव Svabhāva സ്വഭാവം 🇳🇵 Displeasure असन्तुष्टि Asantuṣṭi അസന്തുഷ്‌ടി 🇳🇵 Disparity असमानता Asamānatā അസമാനത 🇳🇵 Dishonour अनादर Anādara അനാദരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Disgrace अपमान Apamāna അപമാനം 🇳🇵 Disease रोग Rōga രോഗം 🇳🇵 Discretion विवेक Vivēka വിവേകം 🇳🇵 Discovery आविष्कार Āviṣkāra ആവിഷ്‌ക്കരണം 🇳🇵 Disconnection विच्छेदन Vicchēdana വിച്ഛേദനം 🇳🇵 Disbeliefअविश्वास Aviśvāsa അവിശ്വാസം 🇳🇵 Disappointment निराशा Nirāśā നിരാശ 🇳🇵 Disability अशक्तता Aśaktatā അശക്തത 🇳🇵 Dimension विस्तार Vistāra വിസ്താരം 🇳🇵 Dictionary शब्दकोश Śabdakōśa ശബ്‌ദകോശം 🇳🇵 Diameter व्यास Vyāsa വ്യാസം 🇳🇵 Dialogue संवाद Sanvāda സംവാദം 🇳🇵 Devotion भक्ति Bhakti ഭക്തി 🇳🇵 Development विकास Vikāsa വികാസം 🇳🇵 Devastation विनाश Vināśa വിനാശം 🇳🇵 Detrimental हानिकारक Hānikāraka ഹാനികരമായ 🇳🇵 Destruction विनाश Vināśa വിനാശം 🇳🇵 Destroyer विनाशक Vināśaka വിനാശകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Desire इच्छा Icchā ഇച്ഛ 🇳🇵 Desert मरुभूमि Marubhūmi മരുഭൂമി 🇳🇵 Description वर्णन Varṇana വര്‍ണ്ണനം 🇳🇵 Deposit निक्षेप Nikṣēpa നിക്ഷേപം 🇳🇵 Dependent आश्रित Āśrita ആശ്രിതന്‍ 🇳🇵 Department विभाग Vibhāga വിഭാഗം 🇳🇵 Dental दन्त Danta ദന്ത 🇳🇵 Demonstration प्रदर्शन Pradarśana പ്രദര്‍ശനം 🇳🇵 Demon राक्षस Rākṣasa രാക്ഷസന്‍ 🇳🇵 Deliberation विचार Vicāra വിചാരപൂര്‍വ്വം 🇳🇵 Deity देवता Dēvatā ദേവത 🇳🇵 Deformity विकृति Vikr̥ti വികൃതമായ 🇳🇵 Deformed विकृत Vikr̥ta വികൃതമായ 🇳🇵 Definite निश्चित Niścita നിശ്ചിതമായ 🇳🇵 Defile अशुद्ध Aśud'dha അശുദ്ധമാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Defiance अवहेलना Avahēlanā അവഹേളനം 🇳🇵 Deference आदर Ādara ആദരം 🇳🇵 Defence रक्षा Rakṣā രക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Defeat पराजित Parājita പരാജിത 🇳🇵 Defeat पराजित Parājita പരാജയം 🇳🇵 Defamation मानहानि Mānahāni മാനഹാനി 🇳🇵 Dedication समर्पण Samarpaṇa സമര്‍പ്പണം 🇳🇵 Dedicated समर्पित Samarpita സമര്‍പ്പിച്ച 🇳🇵 Decide निर्णय गर्नुहोस् Nirṇaya garnuhōs നിര്‍ണ്ണയിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Decease मृत्यु Mr̥tyu മൃത്യു 🇳🇵 Decaying क्षय Kṣaya ക്ഷയിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Decay क्षय Kṣaya ക്ഷയം 🇳🇵 Death मृत्यु Mr̥tyu മൃത്യു 🇳🇵 Dead body मृत शरीर Mr̥ta śarīra മൃത ശരീരം 🇳🇵 Dance नृत्य Nr̥tya നൃത്യം 🇳🇵 Daily दैनिक Dainika ദൈനികമായ 🇳🇵 Derivation व्युत्पन्न Vyutpanna വ്യുൽപ്പന്നം 🇳🇵 Devalue अवमूल्यन Avamūlyana അവമൂല്യനം 🇳🇵 Dynasty राजवंश Rājavanśa രാജവംശം 🇳🇵 Duty कर्तव्य Kartavya കര്‍ത്തവ്യം 🇳🇵 Drawing रेखाचित्र Rēkhācitra രേഖാചിത്രം 🇳🇵 Drama नाटक Nāṭaka നാടകം 🇳🇵 Doubt शंका Śaṅkā ശങ്ക 🇳🇵 Donation दान Dāna ദാനം 🇳🇵 Doctrine सिद्धान्त Sid'dhānta സിദ്ധാന്തം 🇳🇵 Divine दिव्य Divya ദിവ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Divide विभाजन Vibhājana വിഭജിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Diverse विविध Vividha വിവിധമായ 🇳🇵 Distrust अविश्वास Aviśvāsa അവിശ്വാസം 🇳🇵 Emulate अनुकरण Anukaraṇa അനുകരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Extremely अत्यन्तै Atyantai അത്യന്തമായ 🇳🇵 Extra अतिरिक्त Atirikta അതിരുകടന്ന 🇳🇵 Extinct विलुप्त Vilupta ലുപ്‌തമായ 🇳🇵 Exposition प्रदर्शन Pradarśana പ്രദര്‍ശിപ്പിക്കല്‍ 🇳🇵 Explosion विस्फोट Visphōṭa സ്‌ഫോടനം 🇳🇵 Explore अन्वेषण Anvēṣaṇa അന്വേഷണാര്‍ത്ഥം 🇳🇵 Explanation स्पष्टीकरण Spaṣṭīkaraṇa സ്പഷ്ടീകരണം 🇳🇵 Experiment प्रयोग Prayōga പ്രയോഗിച്ചു 🇳🇵 Experiment परिक्षण Parikṣaṇa പരീക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Experience अनुभव Anubhava അനുഭവം 🇳🇵 Expatriate प्रवासी Pravāsī പ്രവാസി 🇳🇵 Existence अस्तित्व Astitva അസ്തിത്വം 🇳🇵 Exercise व्यायाम Vyāyāma വ്യായാമം 🇳🇵 Exception अपवाद Apavāda അപവാദം 🇳🇵 Excellent उत्कृष्ट Utkr̥ṣṭa ഉല്‍കൃഷ്‌ടമായ 🇳🇵 Excellence उत्कृष्टता Utkr̥ṣṭatā ഉത്കൃഷ്ടത 🇳🇵 Example उदाहरण Udāharaṇa ഉദാഹരണം 🇳🇵 Examiner परीक्षक Parīkṣaka പരീക്ഷകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Examination परीक्षा Parīkṣā പരീക്ഷ 🇳🇵 Evidence प्रमाण Pramāṇa പ്രമാണം 🇳🇵 Eternal अनन्त Ananta അനന്തമായ 🇳🇵 Establishment स्थापना Sthāpanā സ്ഥാപനം 🇳🇵 Established स्थापित Sthāpita സ്ഥാപിതം 🇳🇵 Essence सार Sāra സാരം 🇳🇵 Especially विशेष गरी Viśēṣa garī വിശേഷമായി 🇳🇵 Equipment उपकरण Upakaraṇa ഉപകരണം 🇳🇵 Equality समानता Samānatā സമാനത 🇳🇵 Epic महाकाव्य Mahākāvya മഹാകാവ്യം 🇳🇵 Entry प्रवेश Pravēśa പ്രവേശം 🇳🇵 Entrance प्रवेश Pravēśa പ്രവേശനം 🇳🇵 Entitlement अधिकार Adhikāra അധികാരപ്പെടുത്തുക 🇳🇵 Entire सम्पूर्ण Sampūrṇa സമ്പൂര്‍ണ്ണമായ 🇳🇵 Enticement प्रलोभन Pralōbhana പ്രലോഭനം 🇳🇵 Enough पर्याप्त Paryāpta പര്യാപ്‌തമായ 🇳🇵 Enlarge विस्तार Vistāra വിസ്‌തരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Energy उर्जा Urjā ഊര്‍ജ്ജം 🇳🇵 Enemy शत्रु Śatru ശത്രു 🇳🇵 Endurance सहनशीलता Sahanaśīlatā സഹനശീലം 🇳🇵 End अन्त्य Antya അന്ത്യം 🇳🇵 Encroachment अतिक्रमण Atikramaṇa അതിക്രമം 🇳🇵 Encroach अतिक्रमण Atikramaṇa അതിക്രമിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Encouragement प्रोत्साहन Prōtsāhana പ്രോത്സാഹനം 🇳🇵 Encouragement प्रोत्साहन Prōtsāhana പ്രോത്സാഹനം 🇳🇵 Emulsion पायस Pāyasa പയസ്യം 🇳🇵 Empty खाली Khālī കാലിയാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Embryo भ्रूण Bhrūṇa ഭ്രൂണം 🇳🇵 Elevated उन्नत Unnata ഉന്നതമായ 🇳🇵 Elegant रमणीय Ramaṇīya രമണീയമായ 🇳🇵 Elegance लालित्य Lālitya ലാളിത്യവും 🇳🇵 Elder जेठो Jēṭhō ചേട്ടന് ‍🇳🇵 Egg अण्डा Aṇḍā അണ്‌ഡം 🇳🇵 Education शिक्षा Śikṣā ശിക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Economics अर्थशास्त्र Arthaśāstra അര്‍ത്ഥശാസ്ത്രം 🇳🇵 Earthquake भूकंप Bhūkampa ഭൂകമ്പം 🇳🇵 Eager उत्सुक Utsuka ഉത്സുകനായ 🇳🇵 Each प्रत्येक Pratyēka പ്രത്യേകം 🇳🇵 Fabulous कल्पित Kalpita കാല്പനികം 🇳🇵 Faeces मल Mala മലം 🇳🇵 Faithful विश्वासी Viśvāsī വിശ്വാസി 🇳🇵 Falsehood असत्य Asatya അസത്യം 🇳🇵 Familiarity सुपरिचय suparichay സുപരിചയം 🇳🇵 Famous प्रसिद्ध Prasid'dha പ്രസിദ്ധനായ 🇳🇵 Fasting उपवास Upavāsa ഉപവാസം 🇳🇵 Fate भाग्य Bhāgya ഭാഗ്യം 🇳🇵 Favour पक्षमा Pakṣamā പക്ഷഭേദം 🇳🇵 Favourable अनुकूल Anukūla അനുകൂലമായ 🇳🇵 Female महिला Mahilā മഹിള 🇳🇵 Feminine स्त्रीलिंगी Strīliṅgī സ്‌ത്രീലിംഗം 🇳🇵 Festivity उत्सव Utsava ഉത്സവം 🇳🇵 Feudal सामन्त Sāmanta സാമന്ത 🇳🇵 Fever ज्वरो Jvarō ജ്വരം 🇳🇵 Fickle चंचल Can̄cala ചഞ്ചലമായ 🇳🇵 Final अन्तिम Antima അന്തിമം 🇳🇵 Finale समापन Samāpana സമാപ്‌തി 🇳🇵 Finish समाप्त Samāpta സമാപ്‌തി 🇳🇵 Firmness दृढता Dr̥ḍhatā ദൃഢത 🇳🇵 Fitnessस्वास्थ्य Svāsthyaശാരീരികസ്വാസ്ഥ്യം 🇳🇵 Fixed स्थिर Sthira സ്ഥിരമായ 🇳🇵 Flame ज्वाला Jvālā ജ്വാലാമായ 🇳🇵 Flavour स्वाद Svāda സ്വാദ് 🇳🇵 Fleeting क्षणिक Kṣaṇika ക്ഷണികമായ 🇳🇵 Flint चकमक Cakamaka ചക്കുമുക്കിക്കല്ല് 🇳🇵 Flow प्रवाह Pravāha പ്രവാഹം 🇳🇵 Flowered फूल phool ഫുല്ലമായ 🇳🇵 Following अनुसरण गर्दै Anusaraṇa gardai അനുചരവൃന്ദം 🇳🇵 Foolish मूर्ख Mūrkha മൂര്‍ഖമായ 🇳🇵 Force बल Bala ബലം 🇳🇵 Foreign विदेशी Vidēśī വിദേശം 🇳🇵 forgiveness क्षमा Kṣamā ക്ഷമ 🇳🇵 Formation गठन Gaṭhana ഘടന 🇳🇵 Formless निराकार Nirākāra നിരാകാരം 🇳🇵 Fortune भाग्य Bhāgya ഭാഗ്യം 🇳🇵 Fraction भिन्न Bhinna ഭിന്നം 🇳🇵 Fracture भंग Bhaṅga ഭംഗം 🇳🇵 Frantic उन्मत्त Unmatta ഉന്മത്തമായ 🇳🇵 Freedom स्वतन्त्रता Svatantratā സ്വാതന്ത്യ്രം 🇳🇵 Fruit फल Phala ഫലം 🇳🇵 Frustration निराशा Nirāśā നിരാശ 🇳🇵 Fundamental मौलिक Maulika മൗലികമായ 🇳🇵 Funeral अंतिम संस्कार Antima sanskāra അന്തിമ സംസ്കാരം 🇳🇵 Future भविष्य Bhaviṣya ഭവിഷ്യത്‌കാലം 🇳🇵 Future भविष्य Bhaviṣya ഭാവി 🇳🇵 Gem रत्न Ratna രത്നം 🇳🇵 General सामान्य Sāmān'ya സാമാന്യം 🇳🇵 Genuine वास्तविक Vāstavika വാസ്‌തവമായ 🇳🇵 Ghost भूत Bhūta ഭൂതം 🇳🇵 Gift उपहार Upahāra ഉപഹാരം 🇳🇵 Goblin भूत Bhūta ഭൂതം 🇳🇵 Goddess देवी Dēvī ദേവി 🇳🇵 Goose हंस Hansa ഹംസം 🇳🇵 Government सरकार Sarakāra സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ 🇳🇵 Grace अनुग्रह Anugraha അനുഗ്രഹം 🇳🇵 Grammar व्याकरण Vyākaraṇa വ്യാകരണം 🇳🇵 Grateful कृतज्ञ Kr̥tajña കൃതജ്ഞതയുള്ള 🇳🇵 Gratitude कृतज्ञता Kr̥tajñatā കൃതജ്ഞത 🇳🇵 Gravity गुरुत्वाकर्षण Gurutvākarṣaṇa ഗുരുത്വാകർഷണം 🇳🇵 Great महान Mahāna മഹാനായ 🇳🇵 Greetings अभिवादन Abhivādana അഭിവാദ്യം 🇳🇵 Grief शोक Śōka ശോകം 🇳🇵 Growth वृद्धि Vr̥d'dhi വൃദ്ധി 🇳🇵 Guardian संरक्षक Sanrakṣaka സംരക്ഷകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Guess अनुमान Anumāna അനുമാനം 🇳🇵 Guest अतिथि Atithi അതിഥി 🇳🇵 Guestअतिथि atithiഅതിഥി 🇳🇵 Guilt दोषी Dōṣī ദോഷം 🇳🇵 Haemorrhaging रक्तस्राव Raktasrāva രക്തസ്രാവം 🇳🇵 Handicapped विकलांग Vikalāṅga വികലാംഗരായ 🇳🇵 Handsomeness सुन्दरता Sundaratā സുന്ദരമായ 🇳🇵 Harm हानि Hāni ഹാനി 🇳🇵 Haughtiness अहंकार Ahaṅkāra അഹങ്കാരം 🇳🇵 Heaven स्वर्ग Svarga സ്വര്‍ഗ്ഗം 🇳🇵 Heavily भारी Bhārī ഭാരമായി 🇳🇵 Hell नरक Naraka നരകം 🇳🇵 Hereafter परलोक Paralōka പരലോകത്തില്‍ 🇳🇵 Hoarseness कर्कश Karkaśa കര്‍ക്കശമായ 🇳🇵 Holy पवित्र Pavitra പവിത്രമായ 🇳🇵 Honor आदर Ādara ആദരവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Hope आशा Āśā ആശ 🇳🇵 Hospitality आतिथ्य Ātithya ആതിഥ്യം 🇳🇵 Human मानव Mānava മാനവീയമായ 🇳🇵 Humidity आर्द्रता Ārdratā ആര്‍ദ്രമായ 🇳🇵 Humour हास्य Hāsya ഹാസ്യം 🇳🇵 Hunter शिकारी Śikārī ശിക്കാരി 🇳🇵 Ideal आदर्श Ādarśa ആദര്‍ശം 🇳🇵 Idle निष्क्रिय Niṣkriya നിഷ്‌ക്രിയനായിരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Idleness आलस्य Ālasya അലസത 🇳🇵 Ignorance अज्ञानता Ajñānatā അജ്ഞത 🇳🇵 Illustrated सचित्र Sacitra സചിത്രമായ 🇳🇵 Imaginary काल्पनिक Kālpanika കാല്പനികം 🇳🇵 Immortal अमर Amara അമരന്‍ 🇳🇵 Immortality अमरत्व Amaratva അമരത്വം 🇳🇵 Immovable अचल Acala അചലമായ 🇳🇵 Impeccable निर्दोष Nirdōṣa നിര്‍ദ്ദോഷമായ 🇳🇵 Imperfect अपूर्ण Apūrṇa അപൂര്‍ണ്ണമായ 🇳🇵 Imperialism साम्राज्यवाद Sāmrājyavāda സാമ്രാജ്യത്വം 🇳🇵 Importance महत्व Mahatva മഹത്വം 🇳🇵 Impossibility असम्भव Asambhava അസംഭവ്യത 🇳🇵 Impossible असम्भव Asambhava അസംഭാവ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Improper अनुचित Anucita അനുചിതമായ 🇳🇵 Impurity अशुद्धता Aśud'dhatā അശുദ്ധാവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Inaction निष्क्रियता Niṣkriyatā നിഷ്‌ക്രിയത്വം 🇳🇵 Inanimate निर्जीव Nirjīva നിര്‍ജീവമായ 🇳🇵 Inappropriately अनुचित Anucita അനുചിതമായി 🇳🇵 Inauspiciousness अशुभता Aśubhatā അശുഭം 🇳🇵 Incantation मन्त्र Mantra മന്ത്രം 🇳🇵 Incarnation अवतार Avatāra അവതാരം 🇳🇵 Incomparable अतुलनीय Atulanīya അതുല്യമായ 🇳🇵 Independent स्वतन्त्र Svatantra സ്വതന്ത്രനായ 🇳🇵 Index अनुक्रमणिका Anukramaṇikā അനുക്രമണിക 🇳🇵 Indifferent उदासीन Udāsīna ഉദാസീനമായ 🇳🇵 Indiscretion अविवेकी Avivēkī അവിവേകം 🇳🇵 Individual व्यक्ति vyakti വ്യക്തി 🇳🇵 Inducement प्रेरणा Prēraṇā പ്രേരണ प्रलोभन Pralōbhana പ്രലോഭനം 🇳🇵 Infant शिशु Śiśu ശിശു 🇳🇵 Infinite अनन्त Ananta അനന്തം 🇳🇵 Ingredient घटक Ghaṭaka ഘടകം 🇳🇵 Iniquity अधर्म Adharma അധര്‍മ്മം 🇳🇵 Injustice अन्याय An'yāya അന്യായം 🇳🇵 Innovation नवीनता Navīnatā നവീനത 🇳🇵 Innumerable असंख्य Asaṅkhya അസംഖ്യം 🇳🇵 Inscription शिलालेख Śilālēkha ശിലാലേഖനം 🇳🇵 Inspection निरीक्षण Nirīkṣaṇa നിരീക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Inspiration प्रेरणा prerana പ്രേരണ 🇳🇵 Installation स्थापना Sthāpanā സ്ഥാപിക്കല് ‍🇳🇵 Instruction निर्देशन Nirdēśana നിര്‍ദ്ദേശം 🇳🇵 Insufficiently अपर्याप्त Aparyāpta അപര്യാപ്‌തത 🇳🇵 Insult अपमान Apamāna അപമാനം 🇳🇵 Integration एकीकरण Ēkīkaraṇa ഏകീകരണം 🇳🇵 Intense तीव्र Tīvra തീവ്രമായ 🇳🇵 Intensity तीव्रता Tīvratā തീവ്രത 🇳🇵 Intermediate मध्यवर्ती Madhyavartī മധ്യവര്‍ത്തിയായ 🇳🇵 Internal आन्तरिक Āntarika ആന്തരികമായ 🇳🇵 International अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय Antarrāṣṭriya അന്താരാഷ്‌ട്രീയമായ 🇳🇵 Interpret व्याख्या Vyākhyā വ്യാഖ്യാനിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Interpretation व्याख्या Vyākhyā വ്യാഖ്യാനം 🇳🇵 Interval अन्तराल Antarāla അന്തരാളം 🇳🇵 Intolerable असहनीय Asahanīya അസഹനീയം 🇳🇵 Intoleranceअसहिष्णुता Asahiṣṇutāഅസഹിഷ്‌ണുത 🇳🇵 Invaluable अमूल्य Amūlya അമൂല്യമായ 🇳🇵 Invasion आक्रमण Ākramaṇa ആക്രമണം 🇳🇵 Investigator अन्वेषक Anvēṣaka അന്വേഷകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Invisible अदृश्य Adr̥śya അദൃശ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Irrelevant अप्रासंगिक Aprāsaṅgika അസാംഗത്യം 🇳🇵 Jewel रत्न Ratna രത്നം 🇳🇵 Joint संयुक्त Sanyukta സംയുക്ത 🇳🇵 Justice न्याय N'yāya ന്യായം 🇳🇵 Keen उत्सुक Utsuka ഉത്സുകനായ 🇳🇵 Kind दयालु Dayālu ദയാലുവായ 🇳🇵 Knowledge ज्ञान Jñāna ജ്ഞാനം 🇳🇵 Lack अभाव Abhāva അഭാവം 🇳🇵 Lady महिला Mahilā മഹിളാ 🇳🇵 Lamentation विलाप Vilāpa വിലാപം 🇳🇵 Language भाषा Bhāṣā ഭാഷ 🇳🇵 Lateral पार्श्व Pārśva പാര്‍ശ്വസ്ഥമായ 🇳🇵 Laziness आलस्य Ālasya അലസത 🇳🇵 Lead नेतृत्व Nētr̥tva നേതൃത്വം 🇳🇵 Leader नेता Nētā നേതാവ് 🇳🇵 Leadership नेतृत्व Nētr̥tva നേതൃത്വം 🇳🇵 Lecture व्याख्यान Vyākhyāna വ്യാഖ്യാനം 🇳🇵 Lesson पाठ Pāṭha പാഠം 🇳🇵 Letter अक्षर Akṣara അക്ഷരം 🇳🇵 Letters अक्षरहरु Akṣaraharu അക്ഷരങ്ങള്‍ 🇳🇵 liberal उदारवादी Udāravādī ഉദാരചിത്തന്‍ 🇳🇵 Liberation मुक्ति Mukti മുക്തി 🇳🇵 Lifelong आजीवन Ājīvana ആജീവനാന്ത 🇳🇵 Light प्रकाश Prakāśa പ്രകാശം 🇳🇵 Limit सीमा Sīmā സീമ 🇳🇵 Lion सिंह Sinha സിംഹം 🇳🇵 Literacy साक्षरता Sākṣaratā സാക്ഷരത 🇳🇵 Literature साहित्य Sāhitya സാഹിത്യം 🇳🇵 Living जीवित Jīvita ജീവിതരീതി 🇳🇵 Longevity दीर्घायु Dīrghāyu ദീര്‍ഘായുസ്സ്‌ 🇳🇵 Lunarday चन्द्र दिन Candra dina ചാന്ദ്രദിനം 🇳🇵 Mark चिन्ह Cinha ചിഹ്നം 🇳🇵 Marriage विवाह Vivāha വിവാഹം 🇳🇵 Marrow मज्जा Majjā മജ്ജ 🇳🇵 Material सामग्री Sāmagrī സാമഗ്രി 🇳🇵 Maternity मातृत्व Mātr̥tva മാതൃത്വം 🇳🇵 Meaning अर्थ Artha അര്‍ത്ഥം 🇳🇵 Mediation मध्यस्थता Madhyasthatā മധ്യസ്ഥത 🇳🇵 Medicinal औषधी Auṣadhī ഔഷധീയമായ 🇳🇵 Medicine औषधि Auṣadhi ഔഷധം 🇳🇵 Medium मध्यम Madhyama മാദ്ധ്യമം 🇳🇵 Mental मानसिक Mānasika മാനസിക 🇳🇵 Merchant व्यापारी Vyāpārī വ്യാപാരി 🇳🇵 Mercy दया Dayā ദയ 🇳🇵 Merely केवल Kēvala കേവലമായ 🇳🇵 Merit योग्यता Yōgyatā യോഗ്യത 🇳🇵 Metal धातु Dhātu ധാതു 🇳🇵 Meteor उल्का Ulkā ഉല്‌ക്ക 🇳🇵 Methodology पद्धति Pad'dhati പദ്ധതിശാസ്‌ത്രം 🇳🇵 Middle मध्य Madhya മധ്യം 🇳🇵 Military सैन्य Sain'ya സൈന്യം 🇳🇵 Minister मन्त्री Mantrī മന്ത്രി 🇳🇵 Ministry मन्त्रालय Mantrālaya മന്ത്രാലയം 🇳🇵 Miscellaneous विविध Vividha വിവിധതരത്തിലുള്ള 🇳🇵 Misconduct दुराचार Durācāra ദുരാചാരം 🇳🇵 Misfortune दुर्भाग्य Durbhāgya ദുര്‍ഭാഗ്യം 🇳🇵 Mixed मिश्रित Miśrita മിശ്രിതമായ 🇳🇵 Mixture मिश्रण Miśraṇa മിശ്രണം 🇳🇵 Model मातृ Mātr̥ മാതൃക 🇳🇵 Modern आधुनिक Ādhunika ആധുനിക 🇳🇵 Momentary क्षणिक Kṣaṇika ക്ഷണികമായ 🇳🇵 Monstrous राक्षसी Rākṣasī രാക്ഷസീയമായ 🇳🇵 Murder हत्या Hatyā ഹത്യ 🇳🇵 Music संगीत Saṅgīta സംഗീതം 🇳🇵 Myriad असंख्य Asaṅkhya അസംഖ്യ 🇳🇵 Mysterious रहस्यमय Rahasyamaya രഹസ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Name नाम Nāma നാമം 🇳🇵 Nation राष्ट्र Rāṣṭra രാഷ്‌ട്രം 🇳🇵 Nature प्रकृति Prakr̥ti പ്രകൃതി 🇳🇵 Navy नौसेना Nausēnā നാവിക സേന 🇳🇵 Necessary आवश्यक Āvaśyaka അവശ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Necessity आवश्यकता Āvaśyakatā ആവശ്യകത 🇳🇵 Nectar अमृत Amr̥ta അമൃതം 🇳🇵 Need आवश्यक छ Āvaśyaka cha ആവശ്യകത 🇳🇵 Needle सुई Su'ī സൂചി 🇳🇵 News समाचार Samācāra സമാചാരം 🇳🇵 Oath शपथ Śapatha ശപഥം 🇳🇵 Obscured अस्पष्ट Aspaṣṭa അസ്‌പഷ്‌ടമായ 🇳🇵 Observance अवलोकन Avalōkana അവലോകനം 🇳🇵 Official आधिकारिक Ādhikārika അധികാരമുളള 🇳🇵 Official आधिकारिक Ādhikārika ആധികാരികമായ 🇳🇵 Opportunity अवसर Avasara അവസരം 🇳🇵 Opposite विपरित Viparita വിപരീതമായ 🇳🇵 Opposition विरोध Virōdha വിരോധഭാവം 🇳🇵 Ordinary साधारण Sādhāraṇa സാധാരണ 🇳🇵 Organised संगठित Saṅgaṭhita സംഘടിത 🇳🇵 Organiser आयोजक Āyōjaka ആയോജിക 🇳🇵 Organization संगठन Saṅgaṭhana സംഘടന 🇳🇵 Origin उत्पत्ति Utpatti ഉത്‌പത്തി 🇳🇵 Original मूल Mūla മൂലം 🇳🇵 Other अन्य An'ya അന്യമായ 🇳🇵 Outer Space बाहिरी आकाश Bāhirī ākāśa ബഹിരാകാശ 🇳🇵 Outward बाहिर Bāhira ബാഹ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Overview अवलोकन Avalōkana അവലോകനം 🇳🇵 Pain पीडा Pīḍā പീഡ 🇳🇵 Painter चित्रकार Citrakāra ചിത്രകാരന്‍ 🇳🇵 Painting चित्र Citra ചിത്രം 🇳🇵 Pancreas अग्न्याशय Agn'yāśaya അഗ്ന്യാശയം 🇳🇵 Paradox विरोधाभास Virōdhābhāsa വിരോധാഭാസം 🇳🇵 Paradoxically विरोधाभासपूर्ण रूपमा Virōdhābhāsapūrṇa rūpamā വിരോധാഭാസരൂപത്തിലുള്ള 🇳🇵 Parallel समानान्तर Samānāntara സമാന്തരത 🇳🇵 Paralysis पक्षाघात Pakṣāghāta പക്ഷാഘാതം 🇳🇵 Pardon क्षमा करें kshama karen ക്ഷമിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Pardon माफी Māphī മാപ്പ്‌ 🇳🇵 Part भाग Bhāga ഭാഗം 🇳🇵 Partiality पक्षपात Pakṣapāta പക്ഷപാതം 🇳🇵 Particular विशेष Viśēṣa വിശേഷം 🇳🇵 Partition विभाजन Vibhājana വിഭജനം 🇳🇵 Pathetic दयनीय Dayanīya ദയനീയമായ 🇳🇵 Patriot देशभक्त Dēśabhakta ദേശഭക്തന്‍ 🇳🇵 Peace शान्ति Śānti ശാന്തി 🇳🇵 Peacock मयूर Mayūra മയൂരം 🇳🇵 Penance तपस्या Tapasyā തപസ്സ്‌ 🇳🇵 Perception धारणा Dhāraṇā ധാരണ 🇳🇵 Perdition विनाश Vināśa വിനാശം 🇳🇵 Performance प्रदर्शन Pradarśana പ്രദര്‍ശനം 🇳🇵 Permission अनुमति Anumati അനുമതി 🇳🇵 Perplexity व्याकुलता Vyākulatā വ്യാകുലത 🇳🇵 Person व्यक्ति Vyakti വ്യക്തി 🇳🇵 Pesticide किटनासक Kiṭanāsaka കീടനാശിനി 🇳🇵 Petition याचिका Yācikā യാചന 🇳🇵 Philanthropy परोपकारी Parōpakārī പരോപകാരതത്പരത 🇳🇵 Physical शारीरिक Śārīrika ശാരീരികമായി 🇳🇵 Physics भौतिकी Bhautikī ഭൗതികവിദ്യ 🇳🇵 Pickle अचार Acāra അച്ചാര്‍ 🇳🇵 Place स्थान Sthāna സ്ഥാനം 🇳🇵 Planet ग्रह Graha ഗ്രഹം 🇳🇵 Pleasant सुखद Sukhada സുഖകരമായ 🇳🇵 Pledge प्रतिज्ञा Pratijñā പ്രതിജ്ഞ 🇳🇵 Plural बहुवचन Bahuvacana ബഹുവചനം 🇳🇵 Poet कवि kavi കവി 🇳🇵 Poetry कविता kavita കവിത 🇳🇵 Poisonous विषाक्त Viṣākta വിഷകരമായ 🇳🇵 Pomp आडम्बर Āḍambara ആഡംബരം 🇳🇵 Population जनसंख्या Janasaṅkhyā ജനസംഖ്യ 🇳🇵 Pornography अश्लील साहित्य Aślīla sāhitya അശ്ലീലസാഹിത്യം 🇳🇵 Portion भाग Bhāga ഭാഗം 🇳🇵Possibility सम्भाव्यता Sambhāvyatā സംഭവ്യത 🇳🇵 Posture आसन Āsana ആസനം 🇳🇵 Power शक्ति Śakti ശക്തി 🇳🇵 Practice अभ्यास Abhyāsa അഭ്യാസം 🇳🇵 Practise अभ्यास Abhyāsa അഭ്യസിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Praise प्रशंसा prashansa പ്രശംസ 🇳🇵 Pregnancy गर्भावस्था Garbhāvasthā ഗര്‍ഭാവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Prepared तयार Tayāra തയ്യാറാക്കിയ 🇳🇵 Presence उपस्थिति Upasthiti ഉപസ്ഥിതി 🇳🇵 Preservation संरक्षण Sanrakṣaṇa സംരക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Price मूल्य Mūlya മൂല്യം 🇳🇵 Priceless अमूल्य Amūlya അമൂല്യമായ 🇳🇵 Pride गर्व Garva ഗര്‍വ്‌ 🇳🇵 Primary प्राथमिक Prāthamika പ്രാഥമികം 🇳🇵 Prime Minister प्रधानमन्त्री Pradhānamantrī പ്രധാനമന്ത്രി 🇳🇵 Prince राजकुमार Rājakumāra രാജകുമാരന്‍ 🇳🇵 Prize पुरस्कार Puraskāra പുരസ്‌കാരം 🇳🇵 Process प्रक्रिया Prakriyā പ്രക്രിയ 🇳🇵 Produce उत्पादन गर्न Utpādana garna ഉത്‌പാദിപ്പിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Producer निर्माता Nirmātā നിര്‍മ്മാതാവ് 🇳🇵 Product उत्पादन Utpādana ഉല്‍പാദനം 🇳🇵 Productionउत्पादन Utpādanaഉല്‍പാദനം 🇳🇵 Profound गहन Gahana ഗഹനമായ 🇳🇵 Progress प्रगति Pragati പുരോഗതി 🇳🇵 Prohibition निषेध Niṣēdh നിഷേധം 🇳🇵 Promise प्रतिज्ञा Pratijñā പ്രതിജ്ഞ 🇳🇵 Promote प्रचार गर्नुहोस् Pracāra garnuhōs പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Pronounce उच्चारण Uccāraṇa ഉച്ചരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Pronunciation उच्चारण Uccāraṇa ഉച്ചാരണം 🇳🇵 Pronunciation उच्चारण Uccāraṇa ഉച്ചാരണം 🇳🇵 Propaganda प्रचार Pracāra പ്രചാരണം 🇳🇵 Proper उचित Ucita ഉചിത 🇳🇵 Property सम्पत्ति Sampatti സമ്പത്ത്‌ 🇳🇵 Proposal प्रस्ताव Prastāva പ്രസ്‌താവം 🇳🇵 Prose गद्य Gadya ഗദ്യം 🇳🇵 Prosperity समृद्धि Samr̥d'dhi സമൃദ്ധി 🇳🇵 Prostitution वेश्यावृत्ति Vēśyāvr̥tti വേശ്യാവൃത്തി 🇳🇵 Prostrate प्रणाम गर्नु Praṇāma garnu പ്രണമിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Protection संरक्षण Sanrakṣaṇa സംരക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Protective सुरक्षात्मक Surakṣātmaka സുരക്ഷിതമായ 🇳🇵 Protest विरोध Virōdha വിരോധം 🇳🇵 Proved प्रमाणीत Pramāṇīta പ്രമാണീകരിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Publicity प्रचार Pracāra പചാരണം 🇳🇵 Publisher प्रकाशक Prakāśaka പ്രകാശകന്‍ 🇳🇵 Pulse नाडी Nāḍī നാഡി 🇳🇵 Pure शुद्ध Śud'dha ശുദ്ധമായ 🇳🇵 Purification शुद्धिकरण Śud'dhikaraṇa ശുദ്ധീകരണം 🇳🇵 Purpose उद्देश्य Uddēśya ഉദ്ദേശ്യം 🇳🇵 Qualification योग्यता Yōgyatā യോഗ്യത 🇳🇵 Quality गुण Guṇa ഗുണം 🇳🇵 Quiet शान्त Śānta ശാന്തത 🇳🇵 Rain वर्षा Varṣā വർഷം 🇳🇵 Rainfall वर्षा Varṣā വർഷം 🇳🇵 Rank श्रेणी Śrēṇī ശ്രേണി 🇳🇵 Rape बलात्कार Balātkāra ബലാല്‍ക്കാരം 🇳🇵 Rare दुर्लभ Durlabha ദുര്‍ലഭമായ 🇳🇵 Rare विरलै Viralai വിരളമായ 🇳🇵 Rate दर Dara തരം 🇳🇵 Ready तयार Tayāra തയ്യാറായ 🇳🇵 Realistic यथार्थवादी Yathārthavādī യഥാര്‍ത്ഥമായ 🇳🇵 Reality वास्तविकता vaastavikata വാസ്‌തവികത്വം 🇳🇵 Reason कारण Kāraṇa കാരണം 🇳🇵 Rebirth पुनर्जन्म Punarjanma പുനര്‍ജന്മം 🇳🇵 Reception स्वागत Svāgata സ്വാഗതം 🇳🇵 Recommendation सिफारिस Siphārisa ശുപാർശ 🇳🇵 Redemption मोचन Mōcana മോചനം 🇳🇵 Regard आदर Ādara ആദരവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Regeneration पुनर्जनन Punarjanana പുനര്‍ജനനം 🇳🇵Relate सम्बन्धित Sambandhita സംബന്ധിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Relationship सम्बन्ध Sambandha സംബന്ധം 🇳🇵 Relaxation विश्राम Viśrāma വിശ്രമം 🇳🇵 Religeousधार्मिक Dhārmikaധാര്‍മ്മികമായ 🇳🇵 Religious धार्मिक Dhārmika ധാര്‍മ്മികമായ 🇳🇵 Remnant शेष Śēṣa ശേഷിച്ച 🇳🇵 Remorse पश्चाताप Paścātāpa പശ്ചാത്താപം 🇳🇵 Renovation नवीकरण Navīkaraṇa നവീകരണം 🇳🇵 Repentance पश्चाताप Paścātāpa പശ്ചാത്താപം 🇳🇵 Representation प्रतिनिधित्व Pratinidhitva പ്രതിനിധിസ്ഥാനം🇳🇵 Representative प्रतिनिधि Pratinidhi പ്രതിനിധി 🇳🇵 Reproach निन्दा Nindā നിന്ദാപാത്രം 🇳🇵 Reproduction प्रजनन Prajanana പ്രജനനം 🇳🇵 Requisite अपेक्षित apekshit അപേക്ഷിതം 🇳🇵 Requisite आवश्यक Āvaśyaka ആവശ്യകം 🇳🇵 Rescue उद्धार गर्नु Ud'dhāra ഉദ്ധാരണം 🇳🇵 Resistance प्रतिरोध Pratirōdha പ്രതിരോധം 🇳🇵 Respect आदर Ādara ആദരവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Respectable आदरणीय Ādaraṇīya ആദരണീയമായ 🇳🇵 Respective सम्बन्धित Sambandhita സംബന്ധിച്ചുളള 🇳🇵 Respite विश्राम Viśrāma വിശ്രമം 🇳🇵 Ride सवारी Savārī സവാരി 🇳🇵 Rites संस्कार Sanskāra സംസ്‌കാരം 🇳🇵 Ritual अनुष्ठान Anuṣṭhāna അനുഷ്ഠാനം 🇳🇵 Rival प्रतिद्वन्द्वी Pratidvandvī പ്രതിദ്വന്ദി 🇳🇵 River नदी Nadī നദി 🇳🇵 Routine दिनचर्या Dinacaryā ദിനചര്യ 🇳🇵 Rule नियम Niyama നിയമം 🇳🇵 Sacred पवित्र Pavitra പവിത്ര 🇳🇵 Sacrifice त्याग Tyāga ത്യാഗം 🇳🇵 Safe सुरक्षित Surakṣita സുരക്ഷിതമായ 🇳🇵 Sailor नाविक Nāvika നാവികന്‍ 🇳🇵 Salary वेतन Vētana വേതനം 🇳🇵 Salutation अभिवादन Abhivādana അഭിവാദനം 🇳🇵 Salutation अभिवादन Abhivādana അഭിവാദ്യം 🇳🇵 Sanctity पवित्रता Pavitratā പവിത്രത 🇳🇵 Satisfied सन्तुष्ट Santuṣṭa സന്തുഷ്‌ടമായ 🇳🇵 Savage क्रूरता Krūratā ക്രൂരമായ 🇳🇵 Scarce दुर्लभ Durlabha ദുര്‍ല്ലഭമായ 🇳🇵 Scent गन्ध Gandha ഗന്ധം 🇳🇵 Scholar विद्वान Vidvāna വിദ്വാന്‍ 🇳🇵 Script लिपि Lipi ലിപി 🇳🇵 Scrotum अण्डकोष Aṇḍakōṣa അണ്‌ഡകോശം 🇳🇵 Seasoned अनुभवी Anubhavī അനുഭവപരിചയമുള്ള 🇳🇵 Secrecy गुप्तता Guptatā ഗുപ്‌തത 🇳🇵 Section खण्ड Khaṇḍa ഖണ്‌ഡം 🇳🇵 Secure सुरक्षित Surakṣita സുരക്ഷിതം 🇳🇵 Security सुरक्षा Surakṣā സുരക്ഷ 🇳🇵 Seer द्रष्टा Draṣṭā ദൃഷ്‌ടാവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Seldom विरलै Viralai വിരളമായി 🇳🇵 Self confidence आत्मविश्वास Ātmaviśvāsa ആത്മവിശ്വാസം 🇳🇵 Sense भाव Bhāva ഭാവം 🇳🇵 Sentence वाक्य Vākya വാക്യം 🇳🇵 Sentiment भावना Bhāvanā ഭാവം 🇳🇵 Serious गम्भीर Gambhīra ഗംഭീരമായി 🇳🇵 Seriousness गम्भीरता Gambhīratā ഗംഭീരം 🇳🇵 Serve सेवा Sēvā സേവനം 🇳🇵 Shadow छाया Chāyā ഛായാരൂപം 🇳🇵 Shape आकार Ākāra ആകാരം 🇳🇵 Shaved मुंडा Muṇḍā മുണ്‌ഡനം 🇳🇵 Shelter आश्रय Āśraya ആശ്രയം 🇳🇵 Shloka श्लोका Ślōkā ശ്ലോകം 🇳🇵 Sign चिन्ह Cinha ചിഹ്നം 🇳🇵 Signal संकेत Saṅkēta സങ്കേതം 🇳🇵 Silent मौन Mauna മൗനം 🇳🇵 Similar समान Samāna സമാനമായ 🇳🇵 Simple सरल Sarala സരളമായ 🇳🇵 Simplicity सरलता Saralatā സരളത 🇳🇵 Singular एकवचन Ēkavacana ഏകവചനപദം 🇳🇵 Situation स्थिति Sthiti സ്ഥിതി अवस्था Avasthā അവസ്ഥ 🇳🇵 Sky आकाश Ākāśa ആകാശം 🇳🇵 Snake सर्प Sarpa സര്‍പ്പം 🇳🇵 Solstice संक्रांति Saṅkrānti സംക്രമം 🇳🇵 Song गीत Gīta ഗീതം 🇳🇵 Sorrow दु: ख Du: Kha ദുഃഖം 🇳🇵 Soul आत्मा Ātmā ആത്മാവ് 🇳🇵 Sound ध्वनि dhvani ധ്വനി 🇳🇵 Source स्रोत Srōta സ്രോതസ്സ്‌ 🇳🇵 Speech भाषण Bhāṣaṇa ഭാഷണം 🇳🇵 Spirit आत्मा Ātmā ആത്മാവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Spiritual आध्यात्मिक Ādhyātmika ആദ്ധ്യാത്മികമായ 🇳🇵 Split विभाजन Vibhājana വിഭജിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Square वर्ग Varga വര്‍ഗ്ഗം 🇳🇵 Stability स्थिरता Sthiratā സ്ഥിരത 🇳🇵 Stable स्थिर Sthira സ്ഥിരമായ 🇳🇵 Stanza श्लोक Ślōka ശ്ലോകം 🇳🇵 State राज्य Rājya രാജ്യം 🇳🇵 Stimulated उत्तेजक Uttējaka ഉത്തേജിപ്പിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Stimulating उत्तेजक Uttējaka ഉത്തേജകമായ 🇳🇵 Stimulation उत्तेजना Uttējanā ഉത്തേജനം 🇳🇵 Stimulus उत्तेजना Uttējanā ഉത്തേജനം 🇳🇵 Stool मल Mala മലം 🇳🇵 Story कथा Kathā കഥ 🇳🇵 Stranger अपरिचित Aparicita അപരിചിത 🇳🇵 Strife कलह Kalaha കലഹം 🇳🇵 Struggle संघर्ष Saṅgharṣa സംഘര്‍ഷം 🇳🇵 Student विद्यार्थी Vidyārthī വിദ്യാര്‍ത്ഥി 🇳🇵 Study अध्ययन Adhyayana അധ്യയനം 🇳🇵 Style शैली Śailī ശൈലി 🇳🇵 Subject विषय Viṣaya വിഷയം 🇳🇵 Substance पदार्थ Padārtha പദാര്‍ത്ഥം 🇳🇵 Success सफलता Saphalatā സഫലത 🇳🇵 Successful सफल Saphala സഫലമായ 🇳🇵 Sufferer पीडित Pīḍita പീഡിതന്‍ 🇳🇵 Suffering कष्ट Kaṣṭa കഷ്‌ടപ്പാട്‌ 🇳🇵 Sufferring कष्ट Kaṣṭa കഷ്ടത 🇳🇵 Suicide आत्महत्या Ātmahatyā ആത്മഹത്യ 🇳🇵 Sunrise सूर्योदय Sūryōdaya സൂര്യോദയം 🇳🇵 Sunset सूर्यास्त Sūryāsta സൂര്യാസ്‌തമനം 🇳🇵 Superior उच्च Ucca ഉച്ച 🇳🇵 Superior उत्कृष्ट Utkr̥ṣṭa ഉത്‌കൃഷ്‌ടമായ 🇳🇵 Superiority श्रेष्ठता Śrēṣṭhatā ശ്രഷ്ഠമായ 🇳🇵 Supernatural अलौकिक Alaukika അലൗകികത 🇳🇵 Supervisor पर्यवेक्षक Paryavēkṣaka പര്യവേക്ഷകന് ‍🇳🇵 Suppose अनुमान गरिएको Anumāna gari'ēkō അനുമാനിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Surprising आश्चर्यजनक Āścaryajanaka ആശ്ചര്യകരമായ 🇳🇵 Surrender समर्पण Samarpaṇa സമര്‍പ്പണം 🇳🇵 Suspicion शंका Śaṅkā ശങ്ക 🇳🇵 Symmetry सममिति Samamiti സമമിതി 🇳🇵 Sympathy सहानुभूति Sahānubhūti സഹാനുഭൂതി 🇳🇵 Synonym समानार्थी शब्द Samānārthī śabda സമാനാര്‍ത്ഥപദം 🇳🇵 Synonym पर्यायवाची शब्द Paryāyavācī śabda പര്യായം 🇳🇵 Tale कथा Kathā കഥ 🇳🇵 Taste स्वाद Svāda സ്വാദ്‌ 🇳🇵 Teaching शिक्षण Śikṣaṇa ശിക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Temptation प्रलोभन Pralōbhana പ്രലോഭനം 🇳🇵 Term अवधि Avadhi അവധി 🇳🇵 Terrible भयानक Bhayānaka ഭയാനകമായ 🇳🇵 Test परीक्षण Parīkṣaṇa പരീക്ഷണം 🇳🇵 Thank धन्यवाद Dhan'yavāda ധന്യവാദം 🇳🇵 Theory सिद्धान्त Sid'dhānta സിദ്ധാന്തം 🇳🇵 Time समय Samaya സമയം 🇳🇵 Title शीर्षक Śīrṣaka ശീര്‍ഷകം 🇳🇵 Toilet शौचालय Śaucālaya ശൗചാലയം 🇳🇵 Torment पीडा Pīḍā പീഡ 🇳🇵 Torture यातना Yātanā യാതന 🇳🇵 Trade व्यापार Vyāpāra വ്യാപാരം 🇳🇵 Tradition परम्परागत Paramparāgata പരമ്പരാഗത 🇳🇵 Traditional परम्परागत Paramparāgata പരമ്പരാഗതമായ 🇳🇵 Transient क्षणिक Kṣaṇika ക്ഷണികമായ 🇳🇵 Transmission प्रसारण Prasāraṇa പ്രസരണം 🇳🇵 Trauma आघात Āghāta ആഘാതം 🇳🇵 Travel यात्रा Yātrā യാത്ര 🇳🇵 Traveller यात्री Yātrī യാത്രികന്‍ 🇳🇵 Treasure-house खजाना घर Khajānā ghara ഖജാന 🇳🇵 Treatment उपचार Upacāra ഉപചാരം 🇳🇵 Tree शाखा Śākhā ശാഖി 🇳🇵 Tremble कम्पन Kampana കമ്പനം 🇳🇵 Tremor कम्पन Kampana കമ്പനം 🇳🇵 Trivial तुच्छ Tuccha തുച്ഛമായ 🇳🇵 True सत्य Satya സത്യമായ 🇳🇵 Tuberculosis क्षयरोग Kṣayarōga ക്ഷയരോഗം 🇳🇵 Unattainable अप्राप्य Aprāpya അപ്രാപ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Uncertainty अनिश्चितता Aniścitatā അനിശ്ചിതം 🇳🇵 Unclean अशुद्ध Aśud'dha അശുദ്ധമായ 🇳🇵 Undeserving अनावश्यक Anāvaśyaka അനാവശ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Unfavourable प्रतिकूल Pratikūla പ്രതികൂലമായ 🇳🇵 Unfit अयोग्य Ayōgya അയോഗ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Unfortunate दुर्भाग्य Durbhāgya ദുര്‍ഭാഗ്യമുള്ള 🇳🇵 Unfortunately दुर्भाग्यवश Durbhāgyavaśa ദൗര്‍ഭാഗ്യവശാല്‍ 🇳🇵Ungrateful कृतघ्न Kr̥taghna കൃതഘ്‌നമായ 🇳🇵 Unholy अपवित्र Apavitra അപവിത്രമായ 🇳🇵 United एकीकृत Ēkīkr̥ta ഏകീകരിക്കപ്പെട്ട 🇳🇵 Universe ब्रह्माण्ड Brahmāṇḍa ബ്രഹ്മാണ്‌ഡം 🇳🇵 University विश्वविद्यालय Viśvavidyālaya വിശ്വവിദ്യാലയം 🇳🇵 Unkindness निर्दयता Nirdayatā നിര്‍ദ്ദയമായ 🇳🇵 Unknown अज्ञात Ajñāta അജ്ഞാതം 🇳🇵 Unnecessary अनावश्यक Anāvaśyaka അനാവശ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Unpleasant अप्रिय Apriya അപ്രിയമായ 🇳🇵 Unprecedented अभूतपूर्व Abhūtapūrva അഭൂതപൂര്‍വ്വമായ 🇳🇵 Unpublished अप्रकाशित Aprakāśita അപ്രകാശിതമായ 🇳🇵 Unrest अशान्ति Aśānti അശാന്തി 🇳🇵 Unstable अस्थिर Asthira അസ്ഥിരമായ 🇳🇵 Unsteady अस्थिर Asthira അസ്ഥിരമായ 🇳🇵 Untimely असामयिक Asāmayika അസമയത്തുള്ള 🇳🇵 Unused अप्रयुक्त Aprayukta അപ്രയുക്തമായ 🇳🇵 Unwell अस्वस्थ Asvastha അസ്വസ്ഥത 🇳🇵 Unworthy अयोग्य Ayōgya അയോഗ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Unwritten अलिखित Alikhita അലിഖിതമായ 🇳🇵 Usage उपयोग Upayōga ഉപയോഗം 🇳🇵 Useful उपयोगी Upayōgī ഉപയോഗമുള്ള 🇳🇵 Vagina योनी Yōnī യോനി 🇳🇵 Vain व्यर्थ Vyartha വ്യര്‍ത്ഥ 🇳🇵 Vanquished पराजित Parājita പരാജിതനാക്കപ്പെട്ട 🇳🇵 Variety विविधता Vividhatā വിവിധത്വം 🇳🇵 Venture उद्यम Udyama ഉദ്യമം 🇳🇵 Verb क्रिया Kriyā ക്രിയ 🇳🇵 Verify प्रमाणित गर्नुहोस् Pramāṇita garnuhōs പ്രമാണമാക്കുക 🇳🇵 Verse पद Pada പദ്യം 🇳🇵 Vicious क्रूर Krūra ക്രൂരമായ 🇳🇵 Victory विजय Vijaya വിജയം 🇳🇵 View दृश्य Dr̥śya ദൃശ്യം 🇳🇵 Vile नीच Nīca നീചമായ 🇳🇵 Violate उल्लंघन गर्नुहोस् Ullaṅghana garnuhōs ഉല്ലംഘിക്കുക 🇳🇵 Violation उल्लंघन Ullaṅghana ലംഘനം 🇳🇵 Violence हिंसा Hinsā ഹിംസ 🇳🇵 Virtue सद्गुण Sadguṇa സദ്‌ഗുണം 🇳🇵 Vision दर्शन Darśana ദര്‍ശനം 🇳🇵 Visual दृश्य Dr̥śya ദൃശ്യം 🇳🇵 Volcano ज्वालामुखी Jvālāmukhī ജ്വാലാമുഖി 🇳🇵 Vulgar असभ्य Asabhya അസഭ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Vulgarity असभ्यता Asabhyatā അസഭ്യമായ 🇳🇵 Wall भित्ता Bhittā ഭിത്തി 🇳🇵 War युद्ध Yud'dha യുദ്ധം 🇳🇵 Warfare युद्ध Yud'dha യുദ്ധം 🇳🇵 Wealth धन Dhana ധനം 🇳🇵 Wedding विवाह Vivāha വിവാഹം 🇳🇵 Welcome स्वागतम् Svāgatam സ്വാഗതം 🇳🇵 Western Ghats पश्चिमी घाटहरू Paścimī ghāṭaharū പശ്ചിമഘട്ടം 🇳🇵 Whole पूर्ण Pūrṇa പൂര്‍ണ്ണ 🇳🇵 Wicked दुष्ट Duṣṭa ദുഷ്‌ടനായ 🇳🇵 Wickedness दुष्टता Duṣṭatā ദുഷ്ടത 🇳🇵 Widow विधवा Vidhavā വിധവ 🇳🇵 Wife पत्नी Patnī പത്‌നി 🇳🇵 Winner विजेता Vijētā ജേതാവ്‌ 🇳🇵 Wish इच्छा Icchā ഇച്ഛ 🇳🇵 Wish मोह Mōha മോഹം 🇳🇵 Witness साक्षी Sākṣī സാക്ഷി 🇳🇵 Wonder आश्चर्य Āścarya ആശ്ചര്യം 🇳🇵 Wonderful अद्भुत Adbhuta അത്ഭുതകരമായ 🇳🇵 World विश्व Viśva വിശ്വം 🇳🇵 Worried चिन्तित Cintita ചിന്താകുലനായ 🇳🇵 Worship पूजा Pūjā പൂജ 🇳🇵 Worshipper उपासक Upāsaka ഉപാസനന്‍ 🇳🇵 Wrapper आवरण Āvaraṇa ആവരണം 🇳🇵 Writing लेखन Lēkhana ലേഖനം 🇳🇵 Yard आँगन Ām̐gana അങ്കണം 🇳🇵 Youth युवा Yuvā യുവത്വം

Vilmeenkodi (talk) 18:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage.) Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.esamskriti.com/e/History/History-Of-Indian-Languages/History-of-Malayalam-1.aspx. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 02:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

"Proto-Tamil-Malayalam"

The article seems to refer 'proto-tamil-malayalam' as both a dialect of Middle-Tamil of 7th century as well as an ancestral language to both Tamil and Malayalam of prehistoric era. Is there any consensus on the use of 'proto-tamil-malayalam' in the place of 'Dialect of Middle Tamil' ?Are there any reputed sources that discuss this? Wikiwhitewizard (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wikiwhitewizard: At one point, we had this concise version[8] of the lead. The second paragraph was clear about the diverging positions. Proponents of the "deep ancient split" camp have subsequently stuffed their POV all over the place in this and other articles. If you want to locate the mainstream position, I think the quote from Gopinathan Nair (cf. [49] of the current version) from his short article in a broad tertiary specialist source captures it best. –Austronesier (talk) 12:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Austronesier:Thank you that was a really good read. It makes it clear that the evolution/split of the language can't be fully understood through a narrow and linear observation. Wikiwhitewizard (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)