Re: Tamil 0B83: Tamil Aytham and Devanagari VisargaL

From: Sinnathurai Srivas (
Date: Fri Apr 01 2005 - 16:18:55 CST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Tamil 0B83: Tamil Aytham and Devanagari VisargaL"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Michael Everson" <>
    To: "Unicode Discussion" <>
    Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:14 PM
    Subject: Re: Tamil 0B83: Tamil Aytham and Devanagari VisargaL

    > At 07:05 +0100 2005-04-01, Sinnathurai Srivas wrote:
    >>Visarga's properties are vastly or totally different to the
    >>functions of Aytham.
    > Hardly.
    >>Also please see below, a simple abstract of what Aytham is.
    >>1/ The main function of Aytham: (Here h=Aytham, q=Aytham, x=any
    >>consonant) It modulates consonants to give Ahenumised and Aqenumised
    > (These terms are not English.)

    If I try and explain in English, Aytham may be called a Glotaliser, or a modulator of consonants and vowels to form vibrational effect.
    >>such as: kh, mh, ... xh, kq, mq, ... xq
    >>(Note: In Devanagari these are individual letters and in Unicode
    >>these are Devanagari Characters (such as kh, mh, ...xh) such as: hk,
    >>hm, ... hx, qk, qm, ....qx (I do not know about the equivalant in
    > Yes. Aytham is used to show aspirate consonants because the Tamil
    > script lost these.
    Tamil script never had individual characters for Ahenumised (Aspirated consonants nor vowels). Tamil Grammar, probably the worlds oldest surviving written Grammar specifically states that Ahenumised (Aspirated) consonants and vowels are obtained by adding the Aytham.
    such as

    Now what exactly is Aspiration? What exactly is VisargaL? What exactly is Anushya?
    These are not English though I have some idea, I do not have clear idea.

    One thing is certain
    You say it is Aspiration.
    UC is adamant that it is VisargaL.

    I'm certain that VisargaL is definitly not Aspirations nor Anushya.

    What are these?

    > Aytham has three circles. Tamil Grantha Visarga has two circles. The
    > visarga indicates an aspiration of a vowel, specifically, an original
    > Sanskrit -s which became -h.

    Aytham has three circles and forms consonant aspirations, Vowel Aspirations, lead-consonant Aspirations, lead-vowel aspirations.

    So it is not visarga.

    Tamil grantah Visarga has Two circles. What is Visarga?
    Are you proposing a to add Visarga to Tamil. What is Visarga?

    Not only Sanskrit and Grantha, but all Indic languages added h, s, sh, ssh to their alphabet soup in reletively recent times. I mean relatively recent time.
    All indic used to be phonemis based Alphabet writing system and most of them became phonimic only writing system in the relatively recent times, losing many of the phonemes due to this straight jacketing.

    > It is improbable that the Aytham is unrelated to the Tamil Grantha
    > Visarga. Or to put it positively, it is probable that the Aytham is
    > related to the Tamil Grantha Visarga.
    I do not think Grantha was around, when tamil Grammar was last overhauled.
    Aytham, and the near voiceless vowels are defined in that Grammar as relational alphabet. (This is my translation. it is saarphezuthu/relational alphabet. Aytham is Modulator. near voiceless is suppressor. BuROOK, BeREAK).
    >>Character names are very respectable and has immense value. Grammar
    >>is something passionate to mostly all languages. Character names are
    >>very important.
    > I like character names a lot, as many readers of this list will know.
    > Nevertheless, they are not intended to be encyclopaedic, and it is
    > known that many are imperfect.

    What is wrong with accepting mistakes and correcting mistakes.
    I do not think digital technology minded experts will ever think of keeping untrue definition as a definition. I do not think this is scientific line of thinking. I do not think this is spritually truthfull line of thinking. why is this mess. Why is this desire to untrue?
    What drive this thinking. It is definitly not continuity. Continuity is explaining problems truthfully and take things forward in a smooth and soft way. This is a distructive way of keeping continuity.
    > --
    > Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * *
    Sinnathurai srivas

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 01 2005 - 16:19:32 CST