Tolkāppiyam

''Tolkāppiyam'', also romanised as ''Tholkaappiyam'' ( ta, தொல்காப்பியம், ''lit.'' "ancient poem"), is the most ancient extant Tamil grammar text and the oldest extant long work of Tamil literature. The surviving manuscripts of the ''Tolkappiyam'' consists of three books (''atikaram''), each with nine chapters (''iyal''), with a cumulative total of 1,610 (483+463+664) '' sutras'' in the ''nūṛpā'' meter. It is a comprehensive text on grammar, and includes ''sutras'' on orthography, phonology, etymology, morphology, semantics, prosody, sentence structure and the significance of context in language.

The ''Tolkappiyam'' is difficult to date. Some in the Tamil tradition place the text in the mythical second sangam, variously in 1st millennium BCE or earlier. Scholars place the text much later and believe the text evolved and expanded over a period of time. According to Nadarajah Devapoopathy the earliest layer of the ''Tolkappiyam'' was likely composed between the 2nd and 1st century BCE, and the extant manuscript versions fixed by about the 5th century CE. The ''Tolkappiyam Ur-text'' likely relied on some unknown even older literature.

Iravatham Mahadevan dates the Tolkappiyam to no earlier than the 2nd century CE, as it mentions the ''puḷḷi'' being an integral part of Tamil script. The ''puḷḷi'' (a diacritical mark to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with inherent vowels) only became prevalent in Tamil epigraphs after the 2nd century CE.
According to linguist Prof. S. Agesthialingam, Tolkappiyam contains many later interpolations, and the language shows many deviations consistent with late old Tamil (similar to Cilappatikaram), rather than the early old Tamil poems of Eṭṭuttokai and Pattuppāṭṭu.

The ''Tolkappiyam'' contains aphoristic verses arranged into three books – the ''Eluttatikaram'' ("Eluttu" meaning "letter, phoneme"), the ''Sollatikaram'' ("Sol" meaning "Sound, word") and the ''Porulatikaram'' ("Porul" meaning "subject matter", i.e. prosody, rhetoric, poetics). The ''Tolkappiyam'' includes examples to explain its rules, and these examples provide indirect information about the ancient Tamil culture, sociology, and linguistic geography. It is first mentioned by name in Iraiyanar's ''Akapporul'' – a 7th- or 8th-century text – as an authoritative reference, and the ''Tolkappiyam'' remains the authoritative text on Tamil grammar.

Etymology

The word ''Tolkāppiyam'' is a attribute-based composite word, with ''tol'' meaning "ancient, old", and ''kappiyam'' meaning "book, text, poem, kavya"; together, the title has been translated as "ancient book", "ancient poem", or "old poem". The word 'kappiyam' is of Indo-Aryan origin from the Sanskrit ''Kavya''.

According to Kamil Zvelebil – a Tamil literature and history scholar, Tamil purists tend to reject this Sanskrit-style etymology and offer "curious" alternatives. One of these breaks it into three "tol-kappu-iyanratu", meaning "ancient protection f language. An alternate etymology that has been proposed by a few purists is that the name of the work derives from the author's name Tolkāppiyan, but this is a disputed assumption because neither the author(s) nor centuries in which this masterpiece was composed are known.

Date

The dating of the Tolkappiyam is difficult, much debated, and it remains contested and uncertain. Proposals range between 5,320 BCE and the 8th century CE.The Date of the Tolkappiyam: A Retrospect." Annals of Oriental Research (Madras), Silver Jubilee Volume: 292–317

The tradition and some Indian scholars favor an early date for its composition, before the common era, and state that it is the work of one person associated with sage Agastya. Other Indian scholars, and non-Indian scholars such as Kamil Zvelebil, prefer to date it not as a single entity but in parts or layers. The Tolkappiyam manuscript versions that have survived into the modern age were fixed by about the 5th century CE, according to Zvelebil. Scholars reject traditional datings based on three sangams and the myth of great floods because there is no verifiable evidence in its favor, and the available evidence based on linguistics, epigraphy, Sangam literature and other Indian texts suggest a much later date. The disagreements now center around divergent dates between the 3rd century BCE and 8th century CE.

The datings proposed by contemporary scholars is based on a combination of evidence such as:
*comparison of grammar taught in ''Tolkappiyam'' versus the grammar found in the oldest known Tamil-Brahmi and old-Tamil inscriptions
*comparison of grammar taught in ''Tolkappiyam'' versus the grammar found in the oldest known Tamil texts (Sangam era); this evidence covers items such as phonemic shapes, palatals, and the evolution in the use of compounds
*comparison of grammar taught in ''Tolkappiyam'' versus the grammar taught and found in the oldest known Sanskrit texts; this includes tracing verses and phrases found in the ''Tolkappiyam'' that borrow, translate or closely paraphrase verses and phrases found in the works of ancient and influential Sanskrit scholars such as Panini, Patanjali, Manu, Kautilya, Bharata and Vatsyayana.
*comparison of poetry and prose rules taught in ''Tolkappiyam'' versus the actual early Tamil poetry and prose
*Prakrit and Sanskrit loan words (''vadacol''), and inconsistencies between the sutras of the ''Tolkappiyam''

Dates proposed

*In his book published in 1925, T. R. Sesha Iyengar – a scholar of Dravidian literature and history, states that the ''Tolkappiyam'' while explaining grammar, uses terms for various forms of marriage in the ''Kalaviyal'' chapter. Elsewhere it mentions terms related to caste. Such ideas about different weddings and caste, states Iyengar, must be the influence of Sanskrit and Indo-Aryan ideologies. He disagrees with those European scholars who refuse to "concede high antiquity to the Dravidian civilization", and as a compromise suggests the Tolkappiyam was composed "before the Christian era".
* In post-Independence India, the Tamil scholar Gift Siromoney states that the Tolkappiyam should be dated based on the chronology of TALBI-P system based inscriptions, which is difficult to date. He suggests that this could be around the time of Ashoka, or centuries later.
* Iravatham Mahadevan dates the Tolkappiyam to no earlier than the 2nd century CE, as it mentions the ''puḷḷi'' being an integral part of Tamil script. The ''puḷḷi'' a diacritical mark to distinguish pure consonants from consonants with inherent vowels only became prevalent in Tamil epigraphs after the 2nd century CE.
* V. S. Rajam, a linguist specialised in Old Tamil, in her book ''A Reference Grammar of Classical Tamil Poetry'' dates it to pre-fifth century CE.
* Vaiyapuri Pillai, the author of the Tamil lexicon, dated Tolkappiyam to not earlier than the 5th or 6th century CE.Vaiyapuri Pillai, S. 1956. History of Tamil language and literature; beginning to 1000 A.D.. Madras: New Century Book House.
* Kamil V. Zvelebil dates the earliest layer, the core ''Ur-text'' of the Tolkappiyam to 150 BCE or later. In his 1974 review, Zvelebil places Book 1 and 2 of the ''Tolkappiyam'' in the 100 BCE to 250 CE period. Rest of the sections and sutras of the text to centuries between 3rd and 5th century CE. The extant manuscripts of Tolkappiyam are based on the "final redaction" of the 5th century, states Zvelebil.
* Takanobu Takahashi, a Japanese Indologist, states that the Tolkappiyam has several layers with the oldest dating to 1st or 2nd century CE, and the newest and the final redaction dating to the 5th or 6th century CE.
* A C Burnell, a 19th-century Indologist who contributed to the study of Dravidian languages was of the view that the ''Tolkappiyam'' could not be dated to "much later than the eighth century.""It is thus impossible to put the original text much later than the eighth century, for by the tenth century the whole Pāṇḍiya kingdom had fallen under the orthodox Coḷas."
* Herman Tieken, a Dutch scholar, states that the Tolkappiyam dates from the 9th century CE at the earliest. He arrives at this conclusion by treating the Tolkappiyam and the anthologies of Sangam literature as part of a 9th-century Pandyan project to raise the prestige of Tamil as a classical language equal to Sanskrit, and assigning new dates to the traditionally accepted dates for a vast section of divergent literature (Sangam literature, post-Sangam literature and Bhakti literature like Tevaram).Tieken, Herman Joseph Hugo. 2001. Kāvya in South India: old Tamil Caṅkam poetry. Groningen: Egbert Forsten. Hermen Tieken's work has, however, been criticised on fundamental, methodological, and other grounds by G.E. Ferro-Luzzi, George Hart and Anne Monius.

Author

There is no firm evidence to assign the authorship of this treatise to any one author. ''Tholkapiyam'', some traditionally believe, was written by a single author named Tolkappiyar, a disciple of Vedic sage Agastya mentioned in the ''Rigveda'' (1500–1200 BCE). According to the traditional legend, the original grammar was called Agathiam written down by sage Agastya, but it went missing after a great deluge. His student Tolkappiyar was asked to compile Tamil grammar, which is ''Tolkappiyam''. In Tamil historical sources such as the 14th-century influential commentary on ''Tolkappiyam'' by Naccinarkkiniyar, the author is stated to be Tiranatumakkini (alternate name for Tolkappiyan), the son of a Brahmin '' rishi'' named Camatakkini. The earliest mention of Agastya-related Akattiyam legends are found in texts approximately dated to the 8th or 9th century.

According to Kamil Zvelebil, the earliest ''sutras'' of the Tolkappiyam were composed by author(s) who lived before the "majority of extant" Sangam literature, who clearly knew Pāṇini and followed Patanjali works on Sanskrit grammar because some verses of Tolkappiyam – such as ''T-Col 419'' and''T-Elutt 83'' – seem to be borrowed and exact translation of verses of Patanjali's ''bhasya'' and ideas credited to more ancient Panini. Further, the author(s) lived after Patanjali because various sections of ''Tolkappiyam'' show the same ideas for grammatically structuring a language and it uses borrowed Indo-European words found in Panini and Patanjali works to explain its ideas. According to Hartmut Scharfe and other scholars, the phonetic and phonemic sections of the ''Tolkappiyam'' shows considerable influence of Vedic '' Pratishakhyas'', while its rules for nominal compounds follow those in Patanjali's ''mahabhasya'', though there is also evidence of innovations. The author(s) had access and expertise of the ancient Sanskrit works on grammar and language.

According to Zvelebil, another Tamil tradition believes that the earliest layer by its author(s) – Tolkappiyan – may have been a Jaina scholar, who knew ''aintiram'' (pre-Paninian grammatical system) and lived in south Kerala, but "we do not know of any definite data concerning the original author or authors". This traditional belief, according to Vaiyapuri Pillai, is supported by a few Jaina Prakrit words such as ''patimaiyon'' found in the ''Tolkappiyam''.

Content

The ''Tolkappiyam'' deals with ''ilakkanam'' (grammar) in three books (''atikaram''), each with nine chapters (''iyal'') of different sizes. The text has a cumulative total of 1,610 (Eluttatikaram 483 + Sollatikaram 463 + Porulatikaram 664) '' sutras'' in the ''nūṛpā'' meter, though some versions of its surviving manuscripts have a few less. The ''sutra'' format provides a distilled summary of the rules, one that is not easy to read or understand; commentaries are necessary for the proper interpretation and understanding of ''Tolkappiyam''.

;Book 1: ''Eluttatikaram''

"Eluttu" means "sound, letter, phoneme", and this book of the ''Tolkappiyam'' covers the sounds of the Tamil language, how they are produced (phonology). It includes ''punarcci'' (''lit.'' "joining, copulation") which is combination of sounds, orthography, graphemic and phonetics with sounds as they are produced and listened to. The phonemic inventory it includes consists of 5 long vowels, 5 short vowels, and 17 consonants. The articulatory descriptions in ''Tolkappiyam'' are incomplete, indicative of a proto-language. It does not, for example, distinguish between retroflex and non-retroflex consonants, states Thomas Lehmann. The phonetic and phonemic sections of the first book show the influence of Vedic Pratisakhyas, states Hartmut Scharfe, but with some differences. For example, unlike the Pratisakhyas and the later Tamil, the first book of ''Tolkappiyam'' does not treat /ṭ/ and /ṇ/ as retroflex.

;Book 2: ''Sollatikaram''

"Sol" meaning "word", and the second book deals with "etymology, morphology, semantics and syntax", states Zvelebil. The ''sutras'' cover compounds, some semantic and lexical issues. It also mentions the twelve dialectical regions of Tamil speaking people, which suggests the author(s) had a keen sense of observation and inclusiveness for Old Tamil's linguistic geography. According to Peter Scharf, the ''sutras'' here are inspired by the work on Sanskrit grammar by Panini, but it uses Tamil terminology and adds technical innovations. Verb forms and the classification of nominal compounds in the second book show the influence of Patanjali's ''Mahabhasya''.

;Book 3: ''Porulatikaram''

"Porul" meaning "subject matter", and this book deals with the prosody (''yappu'') and rhetoric (''ani'') of Old Tamil. It is here, that the book covers the two genres found in classical Tamil literature: ''akam'' (love, erotics, interior world) and ''puram'' (war, society, exterior world). The ''akam'' is subdivided into ''kalavu'' (premarital love) and ''karpu'' (marital love). It also deals with dramaturgy, simile, prosody and tradition. According to Zvelebil, this arrangement suggests that the entire ''Tolkappiyam'' was likely a guide for bardic poets, where the first two books led to this third on how to compose their songs. The third book's linking of literature (''ilakkiyam'') to the grammatical rules of the first and the second book (''ilakkanam'') created a symbiotic relationship between the two. The literary theory of ''Tolkappiyam'', according to Peter Scharf, borrows from Sanskrit literary theory texts.

Epigraphical studies, such as those by Mahadevan, show that ancient Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions found in South India and dated to between 3rd century BCE and 4th century CE had three different grammatical form. Only one of them is assumed in the ''Tolkappiyam''. The language of the Sangam literature is same as the one described in ''Tolkappiyam'', except in some minor respects.

Commentaries

The ''Tolkappiyam'' is a collection of aphoristic verses in the ''nūṛpā'' meter. It is unintelligible without a commentary. Tamil scholars have written commentaries on it, over the centuries:

The commentary by Ilampuranar dated to the 11th or 12th century CE is the most comprehensive and probably the best, states Zvelebil. The commentary by Senavaraiyar deals only with the second book ''Sollathikaram''. The commentary by Perasiriyar, which is heavily indebted to the '' Nannūl'', frequently quotes from the ''Dandiyalankaram'' and ''Yapparunkalam'', the former being a standard medieval rhetorica and the latter being a detailed treatise on Tamil prosody. Naccinarkiniyar's commentary, being a scholar of both Tamil and Sanskrit, quotes from Parimelalakar's works.

Reception

There are two verses given in support of Tholkappiar's religious outlook. Some made controversial and unconfirmed observation in Sangam poems that there is relatively meager reference given to religion in general. In the ''akam'' songs, Tholkappiar has made reference to deities in the different land divisions: Thirumal for Mullai, Murugan for Kurinji, Vendhan for Maarutham, Kadalon for Neithal and Kotravai for Paalai.

Alexander Dubyanskiy, veteran Tamil scholar from Moscow State University stated, "I am sure that Tolkappiyam is a work which demanded not only vast knowledge and a lot of thinking but a considerable creative skill from its composer." Dubyanskiy also said that the authority of the text was undeniable: "It is a literary and cultural monument of great importance."

See also

* Tamil grammar
* P. S. Subrahmanya Sastri – who was the first to translate Tolkāppiyam into English.

Notes

References

Bibliography

* Albert. 1985. Tolkāppiyam phonology and morphology : an English translation. Madras : International Institute of Tamil Studies.
* Burnell, Arthur Coke (1875). On the Aindra school of Sanskrit Grammarians: their place in the Sanskrit and subordinate literatures. Mangalore: Basel Mission Book and Tract Depository, 8-20.
* Hart, George L. 1975. The poems of ancient Tamil, their milieu and their Sanskrit counterparts. Berkeley: University of California Press.
*
*
*
*
* Selby, Martha Ann (2011) Tamil Love Poetry: The Five Hundred Short Poems of the Aiṅkuṟunūṟu, an Early Third-Century Anthology. Columbia University Press,
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

External links

* at archive.org

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tolkappiyam
History of linguistics
Sangam literature
Grammar books
Ancient Indian grammar works