Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 It is interesting to see the connection of the ancient south India to the ancient cultures of the lower part of the Middle-east. Could anybody tell me the original name of Sumerian people? To the best of my knowledge, the names Sumerian, Elam, Accadian are either fabricated versions or distorted versions of ealier names. Earlier names might reveal still more interesting chapter in the prehistory of India. Thanks. N.R.Joshi ______________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2001 Report Share Posted June 6, 2001 INDOLOGY, Narayan R Joshi <giravani@J...> wrote: > It is interesting to see the connection of the ancient south India to the > ancient cultures of the lower part of the Middle-east. Could anybody tell > me the original name of Sumerian people? To the best of my knowledge, the > names Sumerian, Elam, Accadian are either fabricated versions or > distorted versions of ealier names. Earlier names might reveal still >more interesting chapter in the prehistory of India. Thanks. N.R.Joshi Dear Dr. Joshi, Dr. K. Loganathan, from Malaysia, writes about Tamil-Sumerian connection in Indic Traditions list. Forwarded is his message: Regards, N. Ganesan ------ indictraditions, "K.Loganathan" <subas@p...> wrote: Dear Thirumala Thank-you for your interest . Kindly refer to the webpage below: http://loga.tripod.com/tdraphil5.htm I want to draw your attention to the study of Lexical Correspondences between Sumerian and Dravidian languages. I have also studied the syntax of Sumerian and shown that the syntax of historical Tamil can be seen as an EVOLUTE from the Sumerian. The Sumerian also shows features of the Malay-Polynesian languages and hence the origin of the Dravidian folks may be somewhere in SEAsia. Well many scholars are disputing my claim that Sumerian is Archaic Tamil but the more I study the more convinced I become that Sumerian is Archaic Tamil and possibly also the Tamil of First Sangkam which gets mentioned in Silappathikaram and so forth. I have published the Sirbiyam of Enhudu Anna and now about to finish the Mutaribiyam of Sulgi published in instalments in meykandars and Tamil net. I have another 20 or so texts in my collection to be published thus where tamil transliterations are along with comments on lexical correspondes etc. What surprises me is that almost all the words in Sumerian has a Dravidian cognate. This combined with identity in grammatical features shows that Sumerian is Archaic Tamil -- Tamil in fact about 4000 years ago. Another surprising thing I found is that Sanskrit appears to be a late variant of this Sumerian and hence a species of Dravidian language. So far I have studied only the Shanti mantra of Prusha Suktam and parts of the Suktam itself. I have just published online and would include a revised version of it in the new website I am thinking of opening for such studies. I found the study of Hinduism with an understanding of Sumerian quite illuminating. Another fascinating thing is that: the semitic faiths appear to be various adaptations of religious and metaphysical ideas found in the Sumerian literature. By the way Sumeria was located where modern Iraq is. And so for these and many other reasons I continue to study Sumerian Dravidian and Hinduism along these lines, each illuminating the other. Loga Thirumala Raya Halemane wrote: > Dear Loga, > > Tell us more about the Sumerian connection. > I am ignorant on this. > > Thirumala Raya Halemane > rhaleman@o... > > > indictraditions- > > > > Your use of is subject to --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2001 Report Share Posted June 6, 2001 INDOLOGY, Narayan R Joshi <giravani@J...> wrote: > It is interesting to see the connection of the ancient south India >to the ancient cultures of the lower part of the Middle-east. >Could anybody tell me the original name of Sumerian people? To the >best of my knowledge, the names Sumerian, Elam, Accadian are >either fabricated versions or distorted versions of ealier names. > Earlier names might reveal still more interesting chapter in the > prehistory of India. Thanks. N.R.Joshi While Dravidians and Sumerians possibly interacted in ancient times, it does not seem likely that Sumerian is archaic Tamil. Sumerian texts given in, say, S. N. Kramer's books do not resemble the old Tamil recorded in sangam texts. I believe without the English translations by Sumeriologists, we tamils won't be able to tell what the Sumerian texts mean. Experts of historical linguistics do not include Sumerian as genetically related to Tamil. Few years ago, Dr. Miguel C. Vidal gave some example Sumerian text, which does not sound like old Tamil: Sumerian: e2.kur {gi$}ma2 mah-gin7 gul-gul-lu-de3 kur kug ba.al-gin7 sahar du8-u3-de3 hur.sag {na4}za.gin3-na-gin7 kud-re-de3 uru {d}is$kur-e ba-an-de6-a-gin7 gu2 ki-$e3 ga2-ga2-de3 e2-e kur {gi$}eren kud nu-me-a {urudu}ha-zi.in gal-gal ba-$i-in-de2-de2. translation: "in order to destroy Ekur like a huge boat, to turn it into dust like a mountain where silver is dug, to cut it into pieces like a mountain of lapis lazuli, to bow its neck to the earth like a city that Ishkur has carried away, (therefore) he casts big axes against the house, although it is no mountain where cedars are felled" (Curse of Akkade, 110-115) word-for-word: Ekur {wood}boat huge-like destroy-for_to mountain silver dug-like sand loosen-for_to mountain {stone}lapis-lazuli-like cut-for_to city {god}Ishkur-ERG it-away-carried-like neck earth-towards place-for_to house-wards mountain {wood}cedar fell not-be {copper}axe big-big it-towards-pours Regards, N. Ganesan In the message #4385, agathiyar egroup, Dr. A. Parpola's reply to Mr. Bala Pillai has this to say on Sumerian and Dravidian: " Dear Bala Pillai, Many thanks for your kind words and inquiries. I think it unlikely that anybody will ever succeed in PROVING a genetic relationship between the Dravidian language family and any other language family by means of generally accepted linguistic methodology. This does not mean that Dravidian languages are not related to any other known language families -- of course they are, but the relationship is simply so distant that there is not enough shared linguistic data left to demonstrate the relationship in a convincing manner. A minimum requirement for this would seem to be about 100 good etymologies with regular phonemic correspondences. The structure of Sumerian does not suggest a close relationship with the Dravidian family. The Elamite, Uralic and 'Altaic' languages are good candidates in this respect, and a number of tantalizing etymologies and even some morphological parallels have been presented from them, and yet all attempts have failed to convince critical scholars with most authority." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.