Tamil Discussion archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [WMASTERS] Selvaa's suggestions


This week's sponsors -The Asia Pacific Internet Company (APIC)
  @  Nothing Less Than A Tamil Digital Renaissance Now   @
<http://www.apic.net> Click now<mailto:info@apic.net> for instant info

@From selvakum Sat Sep 27 21:39:09 1997
@Received: (from selvakum@localhost)
@	by valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA00383;
@	Sat, 27 Sep 1997 21:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
@Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 21:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
@From: "C.R. Selvakumar" <selvakum@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca>
@Message-Id: <199709280139.VAA00383@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca>
@To: haroldfs@ccat.sas.upenn.edu, selvakum@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca,
@        webmasters@tamil.net
@Subject: Re:  [WMASTERS] Selvaa's suggestions
@Cc: ghart@socrates.berkeley.edu
@Status: R
@    Prof. Schiffman:
@      I asked a few questions and I've retained only relevant parts of
@      your answer. You've brought in many other issues which are
@      no doubt interesting but they open up a can of worms.
@      Based on your answer, Prof. Schiffman, I think, you had stated
@      and continue to make statements,  not permitted by your data.
@*          C.R.(Selva) Selvakumar wrote:  
@*>          Having explained my viewpoint, hopefully better,
@*>          now I want to know why
@*>          you believe in 'purism' of mythology and not 'purism' of language?
@*>          [ may be the basis for this 'mythology', as you put it, is
@*>          based on incorrect observations, but is your claim of
@*>          'pure' mythology based on some firm ground, if I may ask ? 
@*>           Just curious.]  
@*that will destroy the language.  There is no proof to this contention; I
@*do not have statistics on the failure of puristic movements, but the most
@*>      [2] You claim that empirical study shows that purism is 'in general'
@*>          counter-productive ( of what ?) and it leads to abandonment
@*>          of the language in more cases than not. Please tell me how 
@*>          many cases have been studied. Why in some cases such abandonment
@*>          did not take place ( as your statement says) ? 
@*The only case I know of where revival and purism have worked is with
@*modern Israeli Hebrew, and that because it was an immigrant society (in
@*> Does it not  proof-enough that 'purism' itself does not cause
@*So Israel is only one case; I don't see Tamilnadu as another Israel,
@*bucking the world trend on this.  The problem with purism is that my
@*arguments (99% of cases fail, l% succeeds) are likely to be taken as proof
@         Here again you're making a statement I have much trouble accepting.
@         [1] You have not got a large enough sample to make 
@             such asserion, as I understand. Feel free to correct me.
@         [2] The case of Hebrew is not, I think, 'purism' but a revival
@             of a dead language which has no relation to the case of

          This should have been within quotes as 'a nearly dead language'
          not as a dead language. 

@             Tamil. Tamil has had a continuous life of great intensity
@             and variety ( as seen by epigraphical evidences and available
@              manuscripts). Your comparison seems ill-founded, as I see it.
@*that if ONE can do it, SO CAN TAMIL.  I don't believe this, but as I said
@*earlier, we are not dealing with rationality here, we are dealing with
@*belief systems.  
@*>          ( I'm not advocating 'purism', only trying to understand your
@*>          citation of empirical study). How was it proved
@*>          that it was the 'purism' that caused abandonment and not other 
@*>          causes (say like migration, religious conversions, abandonment
@        C.R.(Selva) Selvakumar


Sponsors/Advertisers  needed -  please email bala@tamil.net
Check out the tamil.net web site on <http://tamil.net>
Postings to <webmasters@tamil.net>. To unsubscribe send
the text - unsubscribe webmasters - to majordomo@tamil.net

Home | Main Index | Thread Index