not mentioned in the Nikaṇṭus which usually give the four different cāti, and consider it to denote only casters and not the different linguistic groups. This requires further research before anything definite can be said on it.

There are many Sanskrit words in the Caturakarāti which are not currently used. Perhaps they were in vogue during the author’s period. For example:–

Certain words during this early period were pronounced erroneously and Beschi gave this wrong pronunciation in his book since it was used in the spoken language. For example, அரன்மனை this should be written as mu©kid which is the correct way. But it was pronounced as அரன்மனை which Beschi copied. Similar cases were found in works by native authors. For example, in Rāmaiyyaṉ Ammāṉai this word mu©kid is written as அரன்மனை. ¹¹

This shows us that Beschi has compiled a dictionary to include words of classical Tamil and also ordinary Tamil, while the others more often than not have written dictionaries only for the classical works.

It is essential to note that his work is an important turning point in Tamil lexicography. His four fold division, the alphabetical arrangement, his expressive writing in prose form (unlike his predecessors in this line who wrote in verse) and his combination of the spoken and classical languages have been greatly adopted by later workers in this field. All this makes us agree with Dr. R.P. Sethu Pillai’s opinion that Beschi was the father of the Tamil dictionary.¹²

Among the unilingual dictionaries, the “Manual Dictionary of The Tamil Language” is another important work. It was

11. C. M. Ramachandrañ Chettiar, Ed. Rāmaiyaṉ Ammāṉai, 1950, P. 19

12. Dr. R. P. Sethu Pillai, Alaiyum Kalaiyum. 4th edition, P. 127