on the reader without considerable improvement. Consequently I propose to take up the subject where Schrader left it and as a first instalment of evidence supporting the theory of Dravidian-Uralian relationship present the following list of etymologies of words applying to the body and its parts. A thoroughgoing correspondence between the two groups of languages emerges quite clearly in this respect, a correspondence which is particularly valuable since this part of the vocabulary is classed among the most primitive and essential elements of language. For the time being the list may be left to speak for itself, though here and there phonetic developments are briefly discussed. For the rest details of phonology and other questions that arise are reserved for further contributions to this series. V. Controversy about Words As an example of controversy that centres around words and their derivation, the following extracts are given, from a paper published in Tamil Culture, Vol. IX, 1961, pp. 296 to 299. The author, V. I. SUBRAMONIAM, Professor of Linguistics, University of Kerala, refutes statements made by Professor Paul Thieme in a review of Professor Thomas Burrow's book, The Sanskrit Language. I CANNOT CLOSE this paper without referring the readers to a recent and interesting review of Burrow's book1 by Paul Thieme published in Language, Vol. 31 p. 438. Thieme with unshaken faith in the purity of the Sanskrit Language has given expression to some of his ideas in the form of a refutation to Burrow's statements. He says, "There are no documents in Dravidian which can be dated back to the pre-Christian Era." This statement does not take into consideration the recent findings in Epigraphy in Tamil, and the author depends on the opinions about the date of Tamil literature of certain Western Scholars who had no first hand information about Tamil. The Arikkamedu inscriptions in Tamil are dated by Epigraphists to the pre-Christian Era. On the same type of evidence as is used to date the Rig Veda, Ancient Tamil literature can also be dated to this ancient period. Thieme states, "We have not even evidence for speech contact with Dravidian speakers in olden times. This can of course be inferred from the loan words themselves. But loan words themselves ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1The Sanskrit Language, Faber and Faber, London, 1959. |