Talk:Tamil language

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tamil language article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 4 months

	Tamil language is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 14, 2005.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 14, 2005 Peer review Reviewed February 25, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted May 1, 2007 Featured article review Kept May 28, 2021 Featured article review Demoted Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 6, 2010, June 6, 2011, June 6, 2013, June 6, 2016, and June 6, 2018. Current status: Former featured article

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Languages Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. India: Tamil Nadu / Classical Tamil High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by the Classical Tamil workgroup (assessed as Top-importance). This article is a selected article on the India portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality India-related article. Sri Lanka High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sri Lanka on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sri LankaWikipedia:WikiProject Sri LankaTemplate:WikiProject Sri LankaSri Lanka High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa: Mauritius Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Mauritius (assessed as Mid-importance).

Shouldn't the IPA of Tamil be /t̪amɪɻ/ instead of /t̪amiɻ/? If you listen to the audio and check the English approximation on the Tamil IPA page, it fits the bill of an /ɪ/ instead of an /i/.

I am not Tamil, so take of that as you will. Nirbodha (talk) 03:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't /ɪ/ since that's not a phoneme of Tamil. Phonemically it is /i/. It does sound to my ear an awful lot like [ɪ]. And having looked at the spectrograph it is, of course, somewhere in between, but closer to [ɪ] by my judgement. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would it then be of benefit to replace the recording with a more phonologically appropriate version? Nirbodha (talk) 06:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are simply saying that it isn't /ɪ/ because there is no letter in Tamil representing that sound. However many phonemes do not have or have the same letter representing them in Tamil. For instance, at the end of words it is /ɯ/ not /u/ this is known as குற்றியலுகரம் and there are many sources to support this. Similarly, it is not /i/ representing "thameezh" but rather it is an unrounded vowel sound more aptly represented by /ɪ/. Reaman2345 (talk) 10:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am saying it isn't /ɪ/, because the source I'm referencing, Keane (2004), does not list that as a phoneme. What you describe sounds like a phonological rule in which the underlying sound is altered based on the context of the phoneme. Indeed Keane (2004) states that /i/ undergoes a "reduction in both duration and quality" in non-initial syllables. Feel free to offer up alternative sources that provide a differing analysis. I do not consider myself an expert so I just go by what I read. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keane, Elinor (2004), "Tamil", Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 34 (1), Oxford University Phonetics Laboratory: 111–116, doi:10.1017/S0025100304001549

Hi Many thanks to all who have contributed to the above page. Under region there is Sri Lanka Northern province and Eastern province. As shown in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Tamils_of_Sri_Lanka#/media/File:Distribution_of_Languages_and_Religious_groups_of_Sri_Lanka_1981.jpg there are significant Tamils in other regions.

Thank you Thiru NadaThiru (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller

Please review the recent addition diff by @Tirukodimadachengunrur regarding the Tamil-Brahmi script dating back to 600/500 BCE.

The excavations at Keeladi did push its date to sixth-century BCE, but we do not have the evidences of 'writings in Tamil-Brahmi' script discovered at Keeladi,being dated to sixth-century BCE there. Anandwiki.ind (talk) 13:30, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anandwiki.ind typical, tired of this editor, must get on treadmill, hopefully later Doug Weller talk 15:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tired, because of wasting time checking endless pov-pushing?... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This addition diff, edit-summary

Ater getting citation reliability confirm from user Doug Weller and Joshua Jonathan, iam adding the recent Keeladi excavation details of Tamil inception.

referring to Talk:Keezhadi excavation site#Dating and sources, adding

According to recent archaeology excavations at the Pandyas Vaigai river valley Keeladi, the Tamil Brahmi script dates to the sixth century BCE, and Sangam era dates to the same period.^[1][2][3]

• Luc LAPORTE (2022). Megaliths of the World - VOLUME 1. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. p. 547. - no dating of Keezhadi mentioned, even less the Brahmi script. A search for "Brahmi script," though, gives p.429 and p.435 giving 5th century BCE as the earliest dates;
• K Rajan (2021). Recent Radiometric Dates and Their Implications in Understanding the Early Writing System and Early Historic Archaeology of Tamil Nadu. Indian Society for Prehistoric and Quaternary Studies. pp. 57–86. - p.77 does give 6th century BCE for the site, but doesn't mention Brahmi script; p.83-84 says

the remaining 35 samples collected from the cultural layer belong to the Early Historic phase yielding Tamil-Brahmi inscribed potsherds. Of the 35 samples, 14 dates assigned to pre-Ashokan [...] South India, particularly Tamil Nadu, entered into the Early Historic phase in the sixth century BCE as demonstrated by the recent radiometric dates.

So, that confirms 6th century BCE, but no mention of Sangam;

• Taylor & Francis (2021). The Routledge Handbook of Hindu Temples: Materiality, Social History and Practice. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. - mentions 6th century BCE for "Tamil Brahmi," but nog Sangam.

Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:38, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a golden rule at WP:RSN not just to ask whether X is a reliable source, but also what statement is intended to be supported by it. Anything else will not be answered and now we see again why this is so: it could be a trap.

Laporte (2022) only says that the iron-based material culture described in Sangam texts dates back as early as 600 BCE, but makes no mention of the dating of Tamil Brahmic writing.

Gillet's chapter in the Routledge handbook mentions the claim by the Tamil Nadu Archaeology Department about the early dates for Tamil Brahmic writing. Obviously, Gillet (2021) cannot be used for a statement in Wikivoice.

Rajan et al. (2021) is an obscure journal article that is not cited in any secondary source. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but as for now let's go by the principle: if nobody else cites it, why should we? –Austronesier (talk) 09:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology of Anaconda being derived from ānaikkonda (Having killed an elephant) under the section: 'Influence', seems to be a cooked up one. It needs to be reviewed. Anandwiki.ind (talk) 11:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out that "gem". The sources at least are antediluvian, which in itself is not a flaw, but more recent sources certainly will increase the level of confidence for critical readers. –Austronesier (talk) 12:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned-up the lead; it contained repetitios claims of being the oldest [fill in], and an excessive laundry list of states and countries where it is spoken. The remaining length shows how much puffery there was in the lead... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 10:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]