Re: Tamil sha (U+0BB6) - deprecate it?

From: Richard Wordingham (
Date: Sun Jun 26 2005 - 18:56:57 CDT

  • Next message: James Kass: "Re: Tamil Collation"

     An exasperated Michael Everson wrote in response to Sinnathurai Srivas
    >>More than Sanskrit English is the extremely important to be
    >>transliterated in Tamil. This can be done by using Tamil system.


    >>Sanskrit is always seen a wanton intrusion to destroy all Indic
    >>languages and cause confusion.

    This is untrue.

    >>Tamil has been defending it self for hundreds of years. Tamil has
    >>it's own system and a sophisticated system.

    >Tamil is not all that different from any of the other Brahmic scripts we
    >have encoded. The Unicode encoding of Tamil is adequate for the
    >representation of Tamil text.

    >>Unicode is not the entity that should decide the demise of the
    >>ancient and sophisticated Tamil, like the demise of all other Indic

    >This is utter nonsense. Unicode supports Tamil and most of the other
    >scripts of India.

    >>Sanskrit is not Tamil, though Sanskrit borrows vast amount of
    >>technology and vocabulary from Tamil. Let's Tamil follow it's own

    >Sanskrit borrows very little terminology from any language. All of the
    >languages of India, including Tamil. borrow terminology from Sanskrit,

    There has been a movement amongst Tamils, the Pure Tamil Movement, to rid
    Tamil of Sanskrit loanwords. It's by no means a unique phenomenon - German
    deliberately eliminated a lot of vocabulary of French origin, and in the
    20th Century Turkish deliberately eliminated a lot of Arabic words and
    expressions. There are some vitriolically anti-Sanskrit sentiments around
    in India - you'd find a fine collection if you googled for Sanskrit at the
    site .

    There is actually quite a bit of foreign terminology in Sanskrit. Some of
    it is 'hypersanskritised' to hide its foreign origin.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 26 2005 - 18:58:24 CDT