The Transformational Generative (TG) view of the grammatical processes of language or Process Grammar runs through the entire spectrum of Tolkaappiyam - in the Books on Phonology, Syntax and Semantics and Intentional Meanings people live with.
It is this Process Grammar that I have modernized and now extending to the field of Historical Linguistics where the notion of cognate languages are seen in terms of evolutionary developments. I see Rigkrit Sanskrit and Classical Tamil as cognate to each other because they all have as their BASE language SumeroTamil and in which Classical Tamil is a CONTINUATION because of the retention of the basic grammatical processes of the initial SumeroTamil. In terms of the technical terms of Naccinaarkkiniyar, we can say the SumeroTamil is the Karuvi Mozi and Rigkrit, Sanskrit and C.Tamil the Ceykai Mozi but in which while C.Tamil serves as a continuation of SumeroTamil, Rigkrit as something that branched off in view of drastic phonological and other transformations.
Now before I lose the insights I have gained on the TG Phonology and which is part of Process Grammar, as observed by one of the brilliant commentators Naccinaarkkiniyar, and who uses these technical terms of Karuvi and Ceykai, I want to write this piece and which I hope to revise later.
The most interesting observation of Nac about overall philosophy of Tol on Ezuttu, the phonemes implicit in all the sutras is contained in his concepts of Karuvi and Ceykai and their differentiations as below:
>>>>>>>>>>
இக்கூறிய இலக்கணங்கள் கருவியும் செய்கையும் என இருவகைய.
அவற்றுள் கருவி புறப்புறக் கருவியும் புறக்கருவியும் அகப்புறக் கருவியும் அகக் கருவியும் என நால்வகைத்து. நூன்மரபும் பிறப்பியலும் புறப்புறக் கருவி, மொழிமரபு புறக்கருவி, புணரியல் அகப்புறக் கருவி. ‘ஏகார ஓகாரம் பெயர்க் கீறாகா' (எழு.272) என்றாற் போல்வன அகக் கருவி.
இனிச் செய்கையும் புறப்புறச் செய்கையும் புறச் செய்கையும், அகப்புறச் செய்கையும், அகச்செய்கையுமென நால்வகைத்து. ‘எல்லா மொழிக்கும் உயிர் வருவழியே' (எழு. 140) என்றாற் போல்வன புறப்புறச் செய்கை. ‘ல ன வரூஉம் புள்ளி முன்னர்” (எழு. 146) என்றாற் போல்வன புறச்செய்கை. ‘உகரமொடு புணரும் புள்ளி யிறுதி” (எழு. 163) என்றாற் போல்வன அகப்புறச் செய்கை. தொகை மரபு முதலிய ஓத்தினுள் இன்ன ஈறு இன்னவாறு முடியுமெனச் செய்கை உறுவன வெல்லாம் அகச்செய்கை. இவ்விகற்பமெல்லாம் தொகையாக உணர்க.
Translation by me:
All these phonological processes pertaining to the grammatical coherence (of Tamil) can be further classified into Karuvi and Ceykai.
Among these, the Karuvi (the Generative Basis or Deep Structure) is further divided into PuRappuRak Karuvi, PuRak Karuvi, AkappuRak Karuvi and Akak Karuvi. The chapters of Nuun Marabu and PiRappiyal (phonetics) pertain to PuRappuRak Karuvi, the chapter on Mozi Marbu is PuRak Karuvi while the chapter on ‘puNariyal” (word conjuncts) is AkappuRak Karuvi. The sutras like “ eekaaram ookaaram peyark kiiRaakaa ( Ezu. 272) belong to Akak Karuvi.
Now the Ceykai ( the transforms ) are also four types: the puRapuRac Ceykai, puRac Ceykai, AkappuRac Ceykai and Akac Ceykai. The sutras like “ellaa mozikkum uyir varu vaziyee” (Ezu. 140) belongs to PuRappuRac Ceykai. The sutra ‘la na varUum puLLi munnar ‘( Ezu. 146) elucidates the PuRac Ceykai. The sutras like ‘ ukaaramodu puNarum puLLi yiRuti” ( Ezu. 163) are instances of AkappuRac Ceykai. Now in the chapters like ‘Tokai Marabu” where it is described which word final phonemes will get transformed into which phonemes, are instances of Akac Ceykai. All these must be understand collectively.
>>>>>>>>>>
Semantically the term Karuvi and which means the womb, karu, also relates well with the English ‘generate’ and we can equate ‘karuvi’ with the Generative Basis. The Ceykai can mean the products of actions and hence the transforms. Let me explain this matter with a concrete example.
We have the words ‘pal’ (many) and ‘cuvai’ (taste) and when in conjugation we have ‘pal-cuvai’ but which is NOT uttered as such but rather as ‘paRcuvai’. Thus we have here the Deep Structure, the pre-transformational BASE form’ pal-cuvai’ and post transformational Surface form ‘paRcuvai’ . When such phonological transforms in the entire language are studied and which are studied very extensively by Tol. we have the phoneme ‘l’ in the DS getting transformed into the phoneme ‘R’ of SS and which constitutes the IlakkaNam, a linguistic processes that constitutes our pre-existent understanding of grammatical coherence. The ‘-l’ in the DS is the Karuvi Nilai and its transformed state ‘-R’ occasioned by the union of ‘cuvai’ with ‘pal’ is the Ceykai Nilai.
Thus we see that as Nac. has noted, the meta-concepts of Karuvi and Ceykai go together and anticipate each other.
Also it makes clear that such a linguistics is immensely HERMENEUTICAL for we are NOT hypothesizing and then testing and so forth. The understanding that uttering ‘pal-cuvai’ as ‘paRcuvai’ is grammatical, is ALREADY there as the linguistic competence of anyone who has a mastery of Tamil and in explaining this pre-understanding in terms of meta-concepts of Karuvi, Ceykai and so forth, we are only CLARIFYING, making CONSCIOUS what already remains part of the unconscious or TACIT understanding of the grammar of the language.
Unlike in the positive sciences we do not have Theory Building , formulating hypothesis on the basis of it to reach BEYOND the existent conditions and then TEST how true the hypothetical construction is and so forth and which is so evident in the Indo-European linguistics. Such IE Linguistics that seeks out Proto-Indo European as a hypothetical construct cannot be part of Process Grammar and which is the proper shape of Linguistics as much as all the human sciences.
As part of Linguistic Competence of the Tamil language, any fluent speaker has ALREADY an understanding of the IlakkaNam, the grammar constituting processes and what a competent linguist does is to CLARIFY this pre-existent understanding.
Such an activity is VALID when it SUCCEEDS in clarifying the matter and which is shown by the AGREEMENT any speaker shows towards the explanation. I agree with the derivation of PaRcuvai from pal-cuvai and with the above meta-concepts, only because such an understanding is ALREADY with me but which I was not conscious of.
In other words Linguistics can be practiced as a science only as Hermeneutic Science and this is how it has been in the tradition of Tolkaappiyam in India, setting the model for many other sciences that also developed .
ULLAGANAR
( editing and re-paragraphing by his student )
No comments:
Post a Comment