Language Use in Movies: The semiotic conditions
of possible understandings



Meti, Mallikarjun,
Sahyadri Arts college,
Kuvempu university,
Shimoga. metimallikarjun@yahoo.com



This paper intends to focus the understanding of a language use in movies in terms of ‘social semiotics’. The concept ‘social semiotics’ is a concept of the ‘multi-accentuality’of the sign at the centre of semiotic theory and it also tries to apply the other key concepts like ‘style shifting’-Anti-language and Anti-groups’ (Halliday: 1978) and ‘the transformation of experience in narrative’ (Labove: 1978) of the semiotic theory. These concepts usually draw another semiotic system to express the basic set of meanings.

The focus of this paper is the development of ways of understanding the characteristics of multi-modal texts. That concern entails two independent but related projects. One is the analysis of the major modals of representation, through which a particular text is realized, and which it is produced. The second is an attempt to understand the culturally and historically produced potentials of any one semiotic mode for making meaning. Our assumption is that specific modes- the visual, the gesture, musical sound, images, Metaphors”etc,-have potentials for making meanings and have limitations.

In film, “DHWEEPA”1, the character, Nagi-is the representation of feminist projected character. The film at the surface level, it might depict the story on ANECUT and
its related story. However, the real concern of the implicit representation of the story of screenplay, to show a feminist message to the audience. The other mode is insensitive to the realities of the Indian context. It is feminism without a history. “DHWEEPA” is very much a product of the men-dominated society she lives in. In fact, as she tries to protect her family and family members from the dangerous events. At the same time, at the end of the film her husband “GANAPATHIYAPPA” says that ‘niinu neap maatra, ellaa deevara Daye’ (everything happens, because of god’s grace, you are just namesake), this particular discourse tend to suggest, the way in which men-domination plays an important role in order to build an oriental discourse. The strength of the film lies in its patient unhurried exploration of the experience
of ‘Naagi’ from an appendage to the men-dominated set up to an individual. ‘Dhweepa’ also confronts other things which need to look into; such as the problem of sexuality, in the sense, Naagi’s husband Ganapatiyappa suspects‘Naagi’ ,with Krishna in sexual relation. This is what Kasarvalli makes a subtle feminist discourse. On the one hand, the image / metaphorical discourses. Such as the Mantapa, which creates a myth in this particular film, which Sita- Rama used to stay here and share their feelings. Consequently, Naagi and her husband often go there and share their feelings. Metaphorical discourses are becoming very important to punctuate the possible understandings of the movie. It is very much obvious to note at this point, in the film, ‘TABARANAKATHE’, the dialogue, “surya huTTataanoo muLugutaanoo goottaagatilla”-whether sun rises or sunsets, it reveals several possible meaning potentials or conversational involvement. i.e.Tabar, is in confused state of mind, whether freedom has come or not. In the sense, even after independence, the struggle for justice is still going on beyond the capacity. In this way, the film depicts the flash back in order to understand the society, the system, the bureaucracy, this is one these metaphorical extensions. It also confronts us to derive another possible meaning, whether this lights up or not in his life. Every film depicts images, metaphors, in multi accentual manner, which create a lot of meanings and meaning potentials in order to understand the particular texture. The structuralism of the filmic structure is, are which reveals different possibilities of understandings of the given discourse. In the sense, “Tabarana Kathe’’ is a protagonist film of a system of society, government, and bureaucracy. The mode of representations of the “Tabarana Kathe” are persisting in, moral evaluation of on occurrence, on action, or a psychological stance related to a set of events of the system.

Multi-modality is a phenomenon; it has always been the case that a text was realized through a number of modes of representation and communication. The film is now much more prominent as a form communication that it has been for several decades, the film, as text, is producing texts, which are Multi-modal. That is, producers of texts are making greater and more deliberate use of a range of representational and communicational modes, which co-occur within, are text. It has become impossible to know texts reliably by paying attention to speech language alone; it exists as one representational element in a text, which always multi-modal and it has to be understood in conjunction with all the other semiotic mode of the text.
‘Taayee Saheba’ reveals the process of the past, being rendered into the present in a manner that does not convert the past into a remote. Static entity that we have to represent in representations of in it (Manu: 2003) in fact, the past comes through in the film with a life of its own and actually portrays a vibrant cultural dynamics in its scheme that seems to suggest a movements into the future. The cultural landmark that helps are traces the growth of feminist awareness in our context. This “Taayi Saheba” is greatly enhanced by the kind of ambivalence they display towards social institutions and historical situations and not because of the resolutions they offer-in any case this film does not resolve anything in simplistic terms. The common sense has come under sustained attack from two sources, one theoretical and, an empirical. The form originated in the broad field of post-modernism, with the writings of Derrida(1976) particularly important ‘Feminist-Theory’ has lunched a sustained attack on ‘logo centrism’ as a major effects of support for the structures of patriarchy representation of the ‘Taayisaheba’,brings a feminist awareness. ‘Taayisaheba’ extrapolate an experience of ‘reality’ from out of the world of ‘realism’ stated differently; it means that empirical reality is transformed into an ‘experimental reality’. Meaning potential is defined not in terms of the mind but in terms of the culture; not as what the speaker knows, but as what he can do- in the special sense of what he can do(abstract) linguistically(halliday:1978). Meaning potentials are very significant features in understanding the texture of a given film. In the film, ‘Taayisaheba’, ‘Waade’ (a palace) signifies the realities of the role of NARMADA, the way in which she suppresses her motherhood and sexuality, in the sense, APPAASAAHEBA has fathered by CHANDRA of a female child, MANJULI. This oriental discourse is the symbol of masculine authority and famine sexuality of feudal-world system. The irony of situation cannot be missed. APPAASAAHEBA has a mistress, and there by, an out let for his desires, where as NARMADA, the woman in a patriarchal setup, can only have a haranguing from the same man when she attempts to fulfill her physical needs(Manu:2003). Potential, what he can do, in the special sense of linguistics, what he/she can mean and avoiding the additional complication of a distinction between doing and knowing. The meaning potential can then be represented as a systematic option in meaning which may be varied in the degree of their specificity-in what has been called delicacy.

Considering the images, metaphors in its social context, then, we can describe them in broad terms as a behavior potential; and more specifically as a meaning potential, where meaning is a form of behaving. This leads to the notion of representing the experience of persons, regional and cultural identity, consequently, rich local text. This given rich local text depicts the individual experience in transforming the universal experience. The narrative structure of ‘TAAYISAAHEBA’ is unfolding the historical conflicts in order to understand the interplay between the past and present. In the post-structuralism’s point of view, the notion decent erring becomes very important for interpreting the feminist insights of the modern time. In the sense, ‘TAAYISAAHEBA’ could be a symbol of cultural and political freedom. The symbolic representation of the images and metaphors, are very much relevant in this film. The creativity, which underlies the sensibility of modern time in this film, is very relevant.
This paper’s focus is on textuality, on the social origins and production of text as much as on the understanding of text\film. We call this practice social semiotics to draw attention to all forms of meaning as a social activity, set in the field of politics; in structures of power; and subject therefore, to the contestations arising out of the differing interests of the markers of texts. This leads to one telling difference between social semiotics and conventional forms of semiotics. These interests of the marker of a sign lead to a sign to a motivated relation between signifier and signified, and therefore to motivated signs in this sense, in the film ‘TAAYISAAHEBA’, BAALASAAHEBA, the representative of the last generation tries to wash away the smell of perfume by washing his hands in the pond and then increasing desperation tries to rub damp soil on his hands hoping it would erase the perfume. However, it clings like the tangled web of money, power and masculinity, which constitutes the feudal-world. Defeated, he curls up in a foetal position, like a tired and helpless child. The other image is the smile, which light up ‘TAAYISAAHEBA’s face when the lawyer tells her about the possibility of freeing BAALASAAHEBA from the curse of his feudal inheritance (Chenni: 2003).

In a response, style shift, there is a regular association between language and social situation. The entry of outsiders to a local group, for example in a particular film, the character, and cook speaks a variety of language that reflects the attitudes of udapi\mangulerian, bhatts. However, this style signifies the derogator’s attitudes. In the film, Chamandudi. The dialect, which is spoken by Chena and his community, is representation of the Dalita community where as in the fiction; the sub-standard dialect is being used. This style shift takes place in this movie in order to bring out the linguistic, cultural\ethnic identity. This identity is something to do with the attitudes of anti-group and anti-language (Remember, sangybyala and ondandondu kaaladalli).

In understanding the cinemas’ communication in a particular language, the first task is to define at least tentatively the speech repertoire to be studied, attempt to gain some understandings of its social organization and other salient aspects of the culture, and formulate possible hypotheses concerning the diverse ways these socio-cultural phenomenon might relate to patterns of communication. It is crucial that the filmic description of communicative events and speech acts are discussed based on semiotic conditions in understanding the film. Because film is not a story-telling process, it is a constriction of metaphors, images and discourse building.

metimallikarjun CONTRIBUTIONS OF WESTERN SCHOLARS TO KANNADA LINGUISTICS

CONTRIBUTIONS OF WESTERN SCHOLARS TO KANNADA LINGUISTICS

Meti Mallikarjun,
Kuvempu University,
Shimoga.
metimallikarjun@yahoo.com



This write up aims merely at introduction of western scholars’ contribution towards Dravidian linguistics, especially, Kannada linguistics. The debate on colonial impact on Indian culture and lives is still going on, however, in this context, the colonial impact, in fact, is taken for granted in order to understand the western’s contributions to the development of Indian linguistics (i.e. kannada).Therefore, I would like to introduce some of the western scholars who have laid foundation for the modern thinking, perspective and systematic approaches for looking at languages in order to substantiate their native / structural entities. The history of Indian languages which forms an integral part of history of general linguistics in general and in particular, as Dravidian linguistics in India traces back to some where in the first millennium B C, the first attempt was made by Mesopotamia, in old Babylonian times around 1600 B C (Jacobson:1974). Now we study the history of kannada linguistics, of course, in order to understand the contributions which are made by western scholars towards the development of kannada language and linguistics during the colonial and post-colonial periods, the interest which being shown by western linguists. There was time, once Indian grammatical tradition means it is nothing but Sanskrit grammatical tradition but, now this attitude has changed because of western scholars’ intervene, at the same time, Tholkopiam a old Tamil grammar proved that there is a different form of grammatical tradition from Sanskrit grammar in India or Indian grammatical tradition. There fore, the contributions of Christian missionaries to the development of Indian languages have great value. These missionaries laid foundation for the scientific and systematic study of Indian languages and literature. That is how; the contributions of western scholars have become very evident to understand the development of modern linguistics in the context of Kannada / any other in Dravidian languages. The systematic establishment of history of Kannada linguistics and literature has become for two major reasons; 1.political and 2.religion by the missionaries to strengthen their control over the common peoples’ live and culture. To do so, the missionaries tried at best to trace the origin, attitude and development of history of Kannada language and literature. As a result, ancient literature and language has become known and construction of history took place.

The contribution of the Christian missionaries to the process and modernization of Indian languages is a well-acknowledge fact which no serious student or researcher of Indian languages can afford to ignore. In addition to their missionary work, many scholar-priests devoted their lifetime to the study Indian languages, literature, and culture, left many monumental works for the future generations, and paved the way for language and development.


ROBERT CALDWELL (1814- 1891)



Of the many western intellectuals who served for the advancement of the dravidian languages, Bishop Dr Robert Caldwell stands fore most.

Bishop Robert Caldwell was born in a little village in Ireland. A few years after his birth, his parents returned to scotland their mother country and started life in the city of Glasgow. Till his sixteenth year, he lived with his parents and had his education. Later he joined an arts school in the neighbourhood and became an artist and won prizes. However, he was not satisfied with this profession; eager to serve God, he joined the london missionary society as a valunteer in his twentieth year. With its help he studied in the Glosgow Universitry and obtained the degree of Bachelor of Arts.

While he was a student, the study of languages was highly praised in Europe. The idea that by studing languages, one could know many facts in the history and life of people, found a place in the hearts of learned men. It was then that research in languages was done in a systematic way. In those days, the Germans advanced in this department. Experts in this department were rare in English Universities.but Sir Daniel sand ford , the professor of Greek in Glasgow University was an authority in comparative philology and induced his students and helps them to study the good qualities of other languages. Caldwell who was naturally interested in this department, decided to serve the department if he got a chance through the goodwill of this professor.

After his university education in 1837, Caldwell was selected by the London missionary society. and sent to south India for doing religious work .while coming to India, on the way he met a person in the ship who became friendly, he was Charles Philip brown who was the renowned scholar in Telugu,with his help, Caldwell able to understand the important aspects of Sanskrit and Telugu.





BISHOP ROBERT CALDWELL: A Pioneer in Dravidian Linguistics

Bishop Robert Caldwell (1814- 1891), author of ‘A Comparative Grammar of Dravidian or South Indian Family of Languages’ was a missionary who came to India as a member of the London Mission Society. Caldwell’s Comparative Grammar on Dravidian languages established the Dravidian as an independent family of languages. It proves that these languages are genetically different from Sanskrit and other Indo- Aryan tongues. When thoughts like ‘South Indian Languages are interrelated’, they did not emerge from Sanskrit and so on are substantiated by systematic analysis and investigation of Dravidian languages by Robert Caldwell. Because, there was a notion among traditional grammarians of India and abroad that “All Dravidian languages were emerged from Sanskrit and fit it”. Though, even before Caldwell, scholars like Rasmus Rask, Francis Ellis Whyte and Max Muller did point out that the Dravidian was an independent family, it was Caldwell’s work that established this beyond doubt and brought this to the attention of scholars all over the world. Characterized by a scientific approach, a large wealth of language data, widest possible coverage and intimate knowledge of the Dravidian languages, his comparative grammar won instant recognition and approval of scholars. This, the wake of Caldwell brought about a fundamental and revolutionary paradigm shift in the study of Indian languages, especially, of Dravidian languages. The belief that Sanskrit was the mother of Indian languages was shattered. Caldwell proved beyond doubt that language like Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam and Tulu etc are structurally different, and belong to a different family of languages. In addition, this work stimulated wide interest in Dravidian languages, and Dravidian studies emerged as a specialized field of knowledge. Caldwell is deservedly called the father of Dravidology. Nearly 150 years after its first publication, his comparative grammar continues to be the most consulted and studied work in Dravidian linguistics.
Bishop Robert Caldwell contributed a lot to Tamil both in language and literature, where as, it is less, comparatively Tamil to other Dravidian languages, of course, it is a great contribution, one con not deny it. However, it is necessary to present some of the important aspects of and about monumental works of Caldwell, viz A Comparative Grammar of Dravidian or South Indian Languages.
After 16 years of religious work, Caldwell left for England in 1854 and stayed there for 16 months during which period he wrote the Comparative Grammar. Even during these 16 months, he was immersed in religious work and the monumental Comparative Grammar was finished in a very short time. In recognition of this great research work, the Glasgow University conferred on him an LLD degree. In 1873, Caldwell returned to England for the second time and stayed for two years. During this time, he revised his book adding the material that he had collected during the 19 years since its first publication. The second (revised) edition was published in 1857. Towards the end of his life, due to failing health, Caldwell retired from active religious service and settled at Kodaikanal where he built a church in 1886. He had been ordained as Bishop in 1877. ‘History of Tirunelveli District’, Caldwell’s another great contribution to the south Indian studies was published in 1881
A Comparative Grammar of Dravidian or South Indian Family of Languages is a monumental work touching on such diverse aspects as the antiquity of the Dravidian family, affinities of the Dravidian family, Indo-Aryan and Dravidian relations, phonology, morphology and syntax of Dravidian element in Indo-Aryan speeches and Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. Caldwell knew intuitively many linguistic principles formulated much later by modern linguists. His suggestions on etymology of numerals is remarkably close to the conclusions reached years after by Morris Swadesh who made a sweeping study of the homothetic aspects of languages. While Caldwell provides detailed evidence for the antiquity and

Independence of the Dravidian family, he is extremely objective in his statements and seeks to glorify his subject of study. Majority of Caldwell’s insights into the structure and affinities of the Dravidian were corroborated by the evidence from later linguistic research.

In the introduction to his work, Caldwell discusses the origin use of the term Dravidian that came to be the accepted name of the language family after Caldwell’s use of it. Before this, the languages were called Tamilian or south Indian languages. Following this, Caldwell enumerates the Dravidian languages known during his time. This included six cultivated languages and six tribal languages. Tamil, Kannada (canarese), Telagu, Malayalam, Tulu, and Kodagu (Coorgi) are Caldwell has cultivated languages. ToDa, Kota, Gond, KhonD, Rajmahal (Malto) etc are the tribal speeches listed by him. He also knew about the Dravidian elements, which found in Brahui, but has not included this language in his language list.

Based on the comparative study of sixty words, comprising the basic vocabulary of Sanskrit and Dravidian, Caldwell for once and all proved that the Dravidian languages are not related to Sanskrit. Dravidian-Scythian relations, antiquity of Tamil and Dravidian-Indo-Aryan relations are the other topics discussed by him in his introduction.

In the first part following the introduction, Caldwell describes the alphabets and phonology of Dravidian. The three types of scripts in vague in South Indian and the relation with North-Indian scripts are elaborated. The phonemes found in Dravidian, their variations in different contexts and borrowal of cerebral sounds into Sanskrit are also discussed. In section 2, the agglutinative characters of Dravidian and on analysis of verbal and nominal roots of Dravidian are attempted. In section 3, the noun, gender, number, and cases of Dravidian, adjectives and their derivation from nominals are analyzed. Section 4 deals with numerals, section 5 deals with pronouns, section six deals with verb. In the last section, glossarial affinities of Dravidian are discussed.

Caldwell has explicitly stated that the comparative study of a family of languages is the study of ‘comparison of the grammatical principles and forms of the various Dravidian languages in the hope of contributing to more thorough knowledge of (a) their primitive structure and (b) distinctive character’. This is first study in which Caldwell has compared Dravidian languages with other family of languages of Asia and Europe to establish the distinctive character of the Dravidian languages.
A Bibliography of Caldwell’s Books (Related to only Kannada).
Caldwell, R. 1856 (rep. 1961). A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages. Madras: University of Madras.
REV. F. KITTEL (1832- 1903)

Rev.F.Kittel was a protestant Christian born at Rooster Hape in North-West Germany on April 7 1832 as a son of church official. After his school education, he went to Switzerland where he entered the services of Basel mission. At the young age of 21, he came to Dharwar as a missionary in 1853. In addition, later on he moved to Mangalore. Nothing much is known about his early years in Karnataka and about his study of Kannada language and literature. However, within 20 years, Kittel acquired mastery over Kannada, in addition to proficiency in Sanskrit, Persian, Tamil, Konkani and Marathi. In addition, he worked in various places like Dharwar, Hubli, Anandapura, Mangalore and Mercara. It was his in Mercara that he spent most of his stay, as the weather was suited him. During the first twenty years of his stay, he learnt Kannada, Sanskrit, Marathi, Tamil, Konkani and Persian. During this particular period, like other missionaries, Kittel wrote books on bible literature and school textbooks. His bible literature covers translations of bible, poems composed by him on the bible, bible stories and other religious literature. Among school textbooks, his Kannada grammar, school dictionaries, Kannada poems, history books and books on carnatic music, are important and those were published at the request of the department of public instruction, Government of Madras.

Rev. F. Kittel, though a missionary like others in the beginning working towards Christianity, later on , he did not study the language, culture and society of region only to achieve his missionary goal. Rather he developed great interest and love for the Kannada language and people of Karnataka. He made in depth study of the ancient manuscript and classics written by ancient Kannada scholars. He involved himself with the natives to understand their day-to-day language, culture, religion and traditions intimately. As a result, he was published many research and creative works in relation with linguistics and literature.


Kittel’s work and its impact on Dravidology:

Kittel made good use of his assignments: from 1860’s he started publishing extensively, including a considerable number of articles in research journals likes the Indian Antiquary and the journal of the German oriental society. He also authored a large number of Christian tracts and textbooks (see bibliography). From the beginning of the 1870’s Kittel had plans to write other Kannada grammar and dictionary, and from 1877 onwards, he devoted himself to this task nearly exclusively. These works substantiate Kittel’s linguistic and literary talents in Kannada language.
Rev. F. Kittel’s most significant writings on Kannada language are;
1. “Nagavarmana Chandhassu” (i.e. that Nagavarma’s ‘Canarese Prosody’). It is the ‘Naagavarmaa’s Chhandoombudhi’ a Kannada text on prosody was published by him with an elaborate introduction containing a historical out-line of Kannada literature.
2. Kittel is another significant work on Keeshiraaja’s ShabdamaNidarpaNa (1872), the most authentic classical grammar of Kannada. He edited this classical grammar by giving English interpretation and illustrations to every ‘sutra’ of ShabdamaNidarpaNa wherever it is necessary.
Kittel published his magnum opus, the Kannada-English Dictionary in 1894 after twenty years of meticulous work. In addition, Kittel became an authoritative on grammar and dictionary, which paved the way for the standardization and modernization of the Kannada grammar. Kittel collected the material for this Kannada-English Dictionary from 1871 to 1877 living in Karnataka. For this compilation of Kannada-English Dictionary, Kittel has used 18 literary works of old Kannada, 18 of middle Kannada, 4 of modern Kannada, 5 Dravidian dictionaries, 4 Sanskrit dictionaries, 1Marathi dictionary for the collection of lexical data and illustrations (M.Bhat:1984 ). At the same time, Kittel has collected various colloquial forms, idioms, regional forms, usages, citations, proverbs and possible senses of a given lexical item. Kittel might have been courageous to take up the project of bilingual dictionary mainly because he had a comprehensive understanding not only of the structure and function of Kannada, but also the syntactic and semantic (including select ional restrictions ) lexical formative in these languages.
A voluminous work of 1,762 pages was published in 1894; it is also a treasury of Kannada idioms and proverbs (nuDigaTTu and gaade). Another important feature of this dictionary is the use of thick fonts for native (desya) Kannada words of Dravidian origin and thin font for the words borrowed from Sanskrit and other sources. The utility of such a method followed by Kittel for researchers as well as common people is quite evident. Kittel tried to examine and write every word himself (1894: XXii) in to decide on distinctions he followed only trust-worthy and authentic manuscripts. Meanings given by the ancient and modern native writers were properly assessed and represented suitably, interestingly, Kittel states, the compiler’s aim has been to raise his work, as for as possible to the level of modern scholarship, avoiding the creation of such difficulties as con not easily be overcome by intelligent beginners’ (1894:XXV). Kittel tried to give good care of loan words borrowed by Sanskrit from Kannada and vice versa (1894: XXXI-LXIII). In this dictionary, cross-references have been given for variant forms. Moreover, cognates in other Dravidian languages are given after the meaning of the word in English. Similarly, all ‘tadbhavas’ were related to their Sanskrit origins and words of English language commonly used in Kannada are treated. Words of non-Dravidian origin have also been traced to their source. At the same time, all these special features, this made it an outstanding work of Rev. F. Kittel.
It is interesting to note that Kittel was both lexicographer and grammarian. In fact, there seems to be logic about it. His interest to become both will have to be appreciated in the light of a mutual dependence or interdependence of ‘lexicon’ and ‘grammar’ which is of first class importance (Zgusta:1971:18) in modern theoretical thinking in linguistics, especially in transformational grammar. More than grammar lexicography is an activity in which tradition plays a great role (Zgusta: 1971:18). There fore, Rev. F. Kittel could able to bring a grammar on Kannada in 1903 entitled “A Grammar of the Kannada Language”- this present volume of grammar is chiefly based on Keeshiraaja’s ShabdamaNidarpaNa, the terminology of this his grammar is simple, and fit for the three dialects of Kannada viz ancient, medieval and modern. At the same time, Kittel’s reliance on the ancient, medieval and modern dialects of Kannada in his grammar is indicative of his intentions on historical validation (Andrewskutty: 1998). Other than the above-discussed works, there are some more significant works and research papers on epigraphy, manuscripts, literature, Granthsampaadane, culture, language and society, most of which appeared in the journals ‘Indian Antiquary’ and other various Indian and German news papers and magazines.
The following list of works of Rev.F.Kittel can witness the outstanding contributions to the Kannada language and literature. Writings by Rev.F.Kittel lists 63 including both books and articles, these books and articles can be classified in different headings to the subject and content.
1) Bible and other writings
2) Coorgs, their language, social customs and superstitions
3) Dravidian language;
a) Meaning and derivation of certain Dravidian words
b) Dravidian numerals.
c) Transcription of Dravidian scripts
d) Dravidian philology
4) Indian prosody and poetry
5) Inscriptions
6) Kannada language
a) Kannada Dictionary
b) Kannada Grammar
c) Kannada Teaching
d) Kannada literature
7) Karnataka music
8) Lingayata literature
9) School textbooks
10) Translations
11) Rev.F.Kittel’s writings in newspapers and literary magazines.

Kittel’s contributions to Kannada are great in many other respects. He was an able scholar to do a lot of work in the area of linguistics, literature, theology, culture, and society.

EMENEAU.M.B (1904- )

Prof. Murry Barnson Emeneau (1904- ) is an outstanding and a renowned scholar in the field of Dravidian studies, Sanskrit and general linguistics. He was born in Canada on Feb.28th, 1904. Prof. Emeneau completed his 100th year on Feb.2004. Prof. Emeneau, through his extremely varied and prolific studies and writings on Dravidian studies ,Sanskrit , general linguistics as well and pioneering field work on unrecorded tribal speeches, Emeneau became one of well known indologists of previous and present century. The name of Prof. M.B.Emeneau is now synonymous with the concept of the great linguistic convergence that defines south Asia (U.N.Singh:2004).
Prof. Emeneau received a B.A. from the Dalhousie University, Halifax in 1923 and one from Oxford as Rhodes Scholar in 1926. He studied Sanskrit, Latin and Greek for his bachelor degree courses and studied under eminent scholars like Franklin and Edgerton and Edger H. Sturtevant. He took an M.A. from Oxford in1931 and PhD from Yale University in 1935. From 1931-1935, he studied Linguistics and Anthropology under Edward Sapir, a pioneer scholar of modern linguistics. Prof Emeneau started out as a Sanskritist and for his PhD; he edited “Vetaalapanchavimshati”, a Sanskrit work. Emeneau taught Latin (1926-1931) and Anthropology (1938-1939) at the Yale University, and then Sanskrit and general linguistics at the University of California, Berkley (1940-1946). From 1946 onwards, he was a full professor and also the chair of the Department of Linguistics (1953-1959) as well as Department of Classics. Emeneau continued teaching there until 1971. After 1971, Emeneau was made Professor Emeritus of Sanskrit and general linguistics, and he also served as president of the linguistic society of America in 1949.

Professor M B Emeneau’s Contribution and Achievements:

Prof. Emeneau is an exemplary scholar in a number of disciplines– Anthropology, Indology and Linguistics. He is also been among a rare tribal linguist who works on both on Dravidian as well as on Indo-Aryan languages. It was during 1935-1938 that Emeneau visited India and conducted field work on a number of tribal languages like toDa, koTa, koDagu and kolami for bringing out the research in the areas of comparative Dravidian, Areal linguistics , Ethnography etc. Emeneau’s publications include his extensive work on Dravidian linguistics, Sanskrit and India as a linguistic Area are original research. In addition to the volumes such as toDa songs, toDa grammar and texts, koTa texts, kolami: a Dravidian language. More than these work he compiled A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary with T. Burrow (1909-1986), is another outstanding Indologist. In addition, most recently came that Sanskrit studies: selected papers (edited by B.A.Van Nootan), Language and Linguistic area (essays: selected by Anwar S. Dil). Linguists have referred to his paper “India as a Linguistic Area” as a classic paper. A statement by K.R. Norman, his worthy of being recalled here , although the phrase ‘linguistic area’ is in common use among linguists. It is interesting to note that it was only invented in 1943 by H.V. Velton as a translation of the German term ‘sprachbund’, and its use did not become wide spread until Emeneau included it in the title of a paper 1956.

In the area of Dravidian linguistics, Emeneau’s contributions fall mainly under four categories:
1) The description of non-literary
2) Comparative interpretation of descriptive data of individual languages
3) Comparative Dravidian, involving a comparison of all languages of the Dravidian family.
4) Theoretical work on structural borrowing and linguistic area hypothesis
5) Identifying and reconstructing the etymological resource of all languages of Dravidian family.
Emeneau’s descriptions and interpretations of Dravidian languages served as ideal models for the later generation of linguists. His analysis of Dravidian languages data still remains authentic. On Kannada, Emeneau’s the most notable works are; Dravidian etymological dictionary (with T.Burrow), comparative phonology (1977), the south Dravidian languages (1966), Kannada Kamp, Tamil Kampan: Two proper nouns (1983) etc. In addition to that, the monumental work that has a place among the great lexicographic work of the world is an immense contribution to Dravidian studies is A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary: T. Burrow and M.B.Emeneau, reprint 1998, XXIX, 609P, ISBN 81-215-0856-8.
This work is a complete and systematic record of completely available Dravidian vocabulary. It covers four major literary languages viz, Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam and some other fourteen minor languages, a considerable amount of material that is here published for the first time. The dictionary is etymologically arranged and the vocabulary is classified into 4572 numbered items. Complete indexes for each language follow. The meanings are given as exhaustively as is practicable in such a work, so that the full range of the application of the each word becomes evident. The dictionary is with some exceptions, confined to the native Dravidian elements to the exclusion of loans from Indo-Aryan. It is the first work of its kind that has been attempted, and it will be an indispensable tool to all those engaged Dravidian linguistics and to the Indian Philology.





A Bibliography of Professor M B Emeneau’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).

1954: Linguistics Prehistory, PAPS, 98 P 282-92 University of California press
1955: Dialectology and comparative linguistics, University of California press
1955: India and Linguistics, JAOS 75, P 145-215
1956: India as a Linguistic Area, Language 32, P 3-16
1962: Dravidian and Indian Linguistics, University of California press
1962: Bilingualism and Structural Borrowing, PAPS 106, P432-42
1962: An Indo-Iranian areal isogloss in Dravidian and Indian linguistics, University of California press, Berkeley
1965: India and Historical Grammar, Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu
1965: Diffusion and evolution comparative linguistics, Annamalai University Tamil Nadu No 5 P1-24
1966: The south Dravidian languages, International seminar on Tamil studies, Kuala Lumpur in April 1966
1967: Dravidian Linguistics, Ethnology and Folk tales, collected papers, Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu
1968: Dravidian and Indo-Aryan: The Indian linguistic Area, conference on Dravidian civilization, Austin, Texas-Decb-1968
1969: Onomatopoetic in the Indian linguistic Area, Language-45 P 274-99
1971: Collected Papers, Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu
1971: The Indian linguistic area-symposium
1974: The Indian linguistic area, Revisited, IJDL-3 P92-132
1978: Review of defining a linguistic area: south Asia, Colin P Masica, Language 54
1961: with Thomas Burrow: A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary, Oxford

THOMAS BURROW (1909-1986)

Thomas Burrow (1909-1986) was an outstanding scholar of Dravidian and Sanskrit languages, who died on June 8, 1986 at the age of 76. He was boden professor of Sanskrit in the University Oxford from 1944 to 1976 and a distinguished international authority on Dravidian languages of India. Thomas Burrow was born on June 29, 1909 in the village of Leck in north Lancashire. He received his early education at Queen Elizabeth grammar school, Kirkby Lonsdale, from which he won scholarships to Christ’s college, Cambridge, in 1927. At Cambridge, he graduated in classics, having specialized in comparative philology, which in itself created a taste for Sanskrit studies and Dravidian languages as well. Prof Thomas Burrow subsequently read for the oriental languages (notably Sanskrit, Pali and Prakrits). Then followed three years of research, one at the school of oriental studies in London, after which he returned to Cambridge. In 1935, he was awarded his doctorate at Cambridge for a thesis on language of the ‘KarosThi’ documents discovered in central Asia by Sir Aurel Stein earlier in the century. From 1935 -1937 he was a research fellow at Christ’s college and from 1937-1944 he was Assistant keeper in Dept. of oriental printed books and Manuscripts at the British Museum. There he took up the Dravidian languages with which few Sanskritists have been acquainted. In 1944, he was appointed Boden professor of Sanskrit at Oxford and keeper of Indian instate, a post that carried with it a Fellowship at Balliol. He retired from professorship in 1976 but continued to hold Emeritus Fellowship of Balliol College, Oxford, until his death.

Thomas Burrow’s Contribution and Achievements:

Prof Thomas Burrow was well known for his extensive work in comparative Dravidian linguistics and Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (DED) in association with M B Emeneau, is another renowned scholar in Dravidian studies. He was a scholar of multidirectional specialization within the broad field of language study.

Thomas Burrow’s contribution to Kannada (Dravidian studies) is both extensive and erudite. In the field of Dravidian studies, Burrow contributed mainly to three areas:
1. Comparative Dravidian
2. Study of the interrelations between Dravidian and Indo-Aryan and
3. Study and description of tribal speeches
Burrow’s major published papers (until 1968) were collected in collected papers on Dravidian Linguistics (1968), published by Annamalai University.
Burrow’s one of the major contributions is Dravidian Etymological Dictionary in collaboration with M B Emeneau (DED: 1961; DEDs: 1968, DEDR: 1984 and Reprint in 1998). He was so much devoted and engrossed in this monumental work that he could recall, by memory, all the time under any particular etyma from the DED. He has not only planned, organized and executed the publication of these volumes along with his distinguished colleague, but has also incorporated lexical items from his field notes on the non-literary Dravidian languages of central India which inclusion has substantially enhanced the depth of coverage in collaboration with the late S. Bhattacharya. The Dravidian Etymological Dictionary is a monumental contribution to Comparative Dravidian Studies. This is an essential tool to any student or researcher of Dravidian working on any aspect of phonology or grammar of the Dravidian languages. This work for the first time brought together cognates from most of the Dravidian languages. Collections of cognates from the major four written languages were done in a limited way even earlier to the DED. However, DED attempted a thorough collection of cognates from literary as well as tribal languages and the compilation was much more systematic and scientific than earlier ones. The DED remains the most basic source for Dravidian Comparative Studies. Cognates grouped under 5,557 lemmas (4,572 in the 1961’s edition). The arrangement of the etyma groups follows the Tamil alphabets (from vowels to consonants i.e. a, aa, i, ii, u, uu, e, ee, ai, o, oo, au, k, k_, n~, c, n, T, N, t, d, p, m, y, r, l, v, R, L, RR, N). Within each order of the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary is moving from south to north, as well as the sub groupings. The second edition contains, etyma from Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam, kurak etc. this DED is the out come of twenty years of work by the compilers, other than, the major lexicographic works of the four written languages and grammars, and word lists of tribal languages.

He published a series of Articles in the Bulletin of the school of oriental (and African) studies, London, under the serial title DRAVIDIAN STUDIES, in this series I-VII dealing with various aspects of Dravidian Phonology, genetic ties, between Dravidian loanwords in Sanskrit. He published two important papers in the transaction of the philological society in 1945 and 1946 formulating and applying a precise methodology for identifying the possible loanwords in Sanskrit. In DRAVIDIAN STUDIES I, II, III, V, VI, Burrow has tackled a number of difficult phonological problems which were either not systematically dealt with or were wrongly formulated earlier. In Dravidian studies I, he established that initial voicing could not be attributed to proto-Dravidian because of the irregular distribution of voiced stop in cognates between Tamil and Kannada on the one hand and Tamil on the other. Thus, he refuted the earlier proposal of Jules Block and Gadavarm. He advanced the following arguments:

1. A large percentage of works in Kannada Telugu beginning with voiced stops have no cognates in Tamil.
2. Where there are such cognates, Tamil and Malayalam have borrowed these from Kannada or Telugu.
3. Voicing in many individual words in Kannada and Telugu can be shown to secondary.
4. Where the correspondences are ancient, there is fluctuation between voiced and voiceless stops in different languages.
In Dravidian studies II, he attacked the problem of the alterations between i/e and u/o in south Dravidian and could show through internal reconstruction that, not all cases of i/u in Tamil and Malayalam and e/o in Kannada and Telugu were traceable to proto-Dravidian.

A Bibliography of Professor Thomas Burrow’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).

Burrow. T. 1938: Dravidian Studies I, BSOAS, 9, 711-722
Burrow. T 1940: Dravidian Studies II, BSOAS, 10, 289-297
Burrow. T 1943: Dravidian Studies III, BSOAS, 11, 122-139
Burrow. T 1944: Dravidian Studies IV, BSOAS, 11, 328-356
Burrow. T 1945: Dravidian Studies V, BSOAS, 11, 595-616
Burrow. T 1946: Some loanwords in Sanskrit, TPS 1-30
Burrow. T 1947: Dravidian Studies VI, BSOAS 12, 132-147
Burrow. T 1948: Dravidian Studies VII, BSOAS, 13, 365-396
Burrow. T and Emeneau M B: 1961: A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary, Oxford.





WILLIAM BRIGHT (1928- )



William Bright (1928- ), Professor Emeritus of linguistics, University of California, Los Angels is reputed scholar in the field of Kannada linguistics, sociolinguistics and the languages of North America and South Asia. He edited the influential journal ‘Language’ for 22 years. The International Encyclopedia of Linguistics and Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics edited by him are two monumental works. An outline of Kannada (1958) is his most important contribution to Kannada linguistics. William Bright presided over the 24 All India Conference of Dravidian Linguists at Kuppam in 1996.

William Bright was born in Oxnard, California on 1928. He graduated from Oxnard Union High School in 1945 and won competitative four-year college scholarship offered by Pepsi-cola Company. In addition, he entered university of California, Berkeley, as premedical student. In 1947, he changed major to Spanish; attended summer school in Mexico City, became interested in Nahualt (Aztec) language. As a result, he started taking linguistic courses at Berkeley with M B Emeneau and Mary Haas, switched to individual major in linguistics. In 1949, he completed his B A in Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley. From there he started fieldwork in spring on Karuk language of northwestern California and attended LSA Linguistic Institute in summer at University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. In addition, in 1950 he continued fieldwork on karuk during summer, after that in 1951 he participated in LSA Linguistic Institute in summer at Berkeley, passed qualifying examinations for linguistics- doctorate and began writing dissertation on Karuk. William Bright married Elizabeth Hallo Ron in 1952. Moreover, drafted into US Army; assigned to military Intelligence unit in Lohfelden, near Kassel, Germany. He returned to US in 1954 and discharged from Army, subsequently; he continued his work at Berkeley on dissertation and again attended LSA Linguistic Institute in summer at University of Chicago. Due to this, he was awarded his PhD in Linguistics on A Grammar of the Karuk Language, Berkeley in 1955. He accepted Rockefeller Foundation Fellowship and came to India for two years to teach linguistics at Decon College, Poona, and to do research on the colloquial variety of the Kannada in Bangalore. At the same time in 1956, he became interested in sociolinguistics through discussion with John Gumperz. In 1957, he returned to US; hired as linguist, school of languages, Foreign Service Institute, Dept. of state, Washington, DC where he taught Hindi, Urdu and French. In 1958 Susannah Bright, Daughter, born in Arlington, Virginia and he was hired in full as Assistant Professor of speech in the University of California, Berkeley for teaching English to foreign students. At the very next year in 1959, hired as Assistant Professor of Anthropology, VCLA for teaching Linguistics, Hindi, and Anthropology. He also taught Hindi in summer session in 1960 at the University of California, Berkeley. William Bright was promoted to Associate Professor of Anthropology at VCLA in 1962. Again, he continued his fieldwork on Yarok in 1963, taught Anthropology in summer school, University of Colorado, Boulder. At the same time, served one year as chair, committee on the Linguistics program, VCLA served one year as Abstracts editor of International Journal of American Linguistics. In addition, became contributing editor, Hand Book of Latin American Studies until 1966. In the mean time, became Review editor of International Journal of American Linguistics. In addition, he participated in seminar on Sociolinguistics at summer LSA Linguistic Institute, Indiana University, Bloomington. He also positioned many editorial positions to various journals. In 1967, he was in Central Institute of English, Hyderabad and University of Delhi on Ford Foundation Fellowship. In 1987, he completed his service as editor of ‘Language’. Moreover, he retired to status Emeritus Professor of Linguistics and Anthropology in 1988, became president, Linguistic Society of America in 1989 and in 1996 , president, DLA, more than , in 1997 he initiated Journal, written language and literacy , Benjamin’s, Amsterdam.
An Outline of Colloquial Kannada, this work describes Kannada structure taxonomically the Bangalore dialect of Kannada, which is spoken by educated Brahmans. However, it is the first descriptive grammar on Kannada which figer-outs the comprehensive structural entities of Kannada. Based on this study, one can acknowledge for establishing the descriptive model in the Kannada Linguistics.
A Bibliography of Professor William Bright’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).

Bright, W. An Outline of Colloquial Kannada, Poona, 1958.
.................. ``Linguistic Change in Some Indian Caste Dialects," IJAL, 26, 3, 1960.
.................. ``Social dialect and language history," CA, 1, 1960.
.................. ``Maisuru kannadada samajika bhasa prabhedagalu," PK. 45, 3 (177), 1960.
…, O shanta Roa & Meera, Narvekar, spoke Kannada (lesson 1-12). Berkeley: centre for south Asian studies, Institute International Studies, University of California, 1960.
Bright, W. and Ramanujan, A.K. ``A Study of Tamil dialects," University of Chicago, 1962 (mimeographed).
.................. ``Sociolinguistic variation and language change," ICL 9, 1964.
Bright, W. Rau, Sh. and Narvekar, M. Spoken Kannada: Lessons 1-12, University of California, Berkeley, 1960 (mimeographed). [PL 4643 B72.]
Bright, William O. 1966. ``Dravidian Metaphony." Lg. 42:2.311-22.
Bright, William O. 1970: ‘Phonological Rules in Literary and Colloquial Kannada’ Journal of American Oriental Society. 90. 1:140-144




ANDRONOV. M. S (1931- )

Mikhail Segreevich Andropov (1931- ) is one of the pioneering figures in Dravidian studies in the erstalile USSR. And has made commendable contributions to Dravidian linguistics, especially, Kannada and Tamil linguistics in order to understand Dravidian studies. Andropov was mastered in the Devanagari alphabet as a school boy and his first love was Bengali in which he specialized at the Moscow Institute of oriental studies. He took his M.A in 1954 from this institute, submitting a thesis on the Dravidian elements in Bengali. He had already developed a strong liking for Tamil and begins to learn Tamil from the writings of pope, Arden and the Russian-Tamil scholars, S. Bulich and Gerasim Lebedev. Later, he studied Tamil under P.Samsundaram and K. Subramaniyam, at Moscow. In 1958, he came to India on a scholarship and studied at the University of Madras under Professors R. Sethupillai, B C Lingam S Hameed. Returning to Moscow, he submitted his doctoral dissertation on Tamil language in 1960. In 1971, he received the D.Litt, degree, also on Tamil linguistics. Andronov initiated many Russian linguists to the study of Dravidian languages. He himself contributed many scholarly articles and books on Dravidian languages, especially Kannada and Tamil. Dravidian languages, which contains a sketch of Dravidian comparative grammar, published in Russian in 1965 and it is published in 1970, is his solid contribution to Dravidian studies. Equally well known is ‘The Kannada Language’, published in Russian in 1962, in 1969 it was published in English, and in 1979 it was published in Kannada by William Madtha. In addition, he also brought some important works in Tamil and Malayalam.
In his study, ‘The Kannada Language’, Andronov has emphasized the important features of literary Kannada. This book is an outline description of modern literary Kannada. In this study, one can find grammatical information about the ancient and medieval stages as well as the colloquial forms of Kannada. The work is quite useful to students of the oriental, philological and linguistic departments having descriptive and historical bias in their curriculum of studies.

A Bibliography of Professor M S Andronov’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).

1968: Two Lectures on the Historicity of Language families, Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu
1969: The Kannada Language (TR, From Russian by V.Korotky, Moscow: Nauk publishing house 1962) in Kannada b y William Madtha in 1977.
1970: Dravidian Languages, Visalandhra Publications, Hyderabad and Moscow.
1975: Dravidian Pronouns: A Comparative Study, Journal of Tamil Studies
1976: Case Suffixes in Dravidian: A Comparative Study- Anthropos, St, Augustine
1977: Pronominal Suffixes in Dravidian: A Comparative Study, IJDL Vol-VI No I Andronov, M. ``On the Future Tense Base in Tamil," TC, 8, 3, 1959.
.................. Jazyk Kannada (Kannada Language), Moscow, 1962.
.................. Dravidijskije jazyki (Dravidian Languages: a Comparative Study), Moscow, 1965.
.................. ``New Evidence of Possible Linguistic Ties between the Deccan and the Urals," SPV, 1961.
.................. ``Dravidian Languages," Ar. Or., 31, 2, 1963.
.................. ``Lexicostatistic analysis of the chronology of disintegration of Proto-Dravidian," IIJ, 7, 2-3, 1964.
.................. ``Materials for a Bibliography of Dravidian Linguistics," TC, 11, 1, 1964.
.................. ``On the Typological Similarity of New Indo-Aryan and Dravidian," IL, 25. PL 4753, A 6413.]

Harold F. Schiff man (1938- )

Prof Harold Schiffman is one of the modern Dravidian Linguists who was born on Feb 19, 1938 in USA. He was educated from various institutions and universities. Therefore, he received his BA from Antioch College in 1960 by opting French and German languages. Moreover, he was in Germany during 1957-58 in the University of Freiberg and he was also there in Annamalai University, Tamilnadu, South India during 1965-66. In the year 1966, he got his MA in Linguistics in the area of specializations of Slavic and Dravidian from the University of Chicago. In addition, he did his PhD in Dravidian Linguistics in 1969 from University of Chicago.

Professor Harold Schiffman was held several positions in different capacities in different institutions. He was Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology in the University of California, Davis. During the years 1967-73, he was Assistant Professor; 1973-78 Associate Professor; 1978-95 Professor in the Department of Asian Languages in the University of Washington. In the mean time, between 1982-87 he was Adjunct Professor of the Chair of Linguistics and Anthropology in the Department of Asian Languages in the University of Washington. And in the years between 1994-95 he was the Director of The Language Center, University of Washington and during these periods 1995-2000 he was Director of Henry R Luce Professor of Language Learning Department Of South Asia Regional Studies and Pennsylvania Language Center, University of Pennsylvania. From 2002 onwards, he has been the Director for Pedagogical Materials Project, South Asia Language Resource Center.

Schiffman, Harold, F. A Reference Grammar of Spoken Kannada, settle& London: University of Washington press, 1983.

It is one of the significant contributions by schiffman. In this work, the author has brought the facts of Kannada language together rather than involving in debates of theoretical nature. All the sections of this work: phonology, the noun phrase, the verb phrase, Syntax gives a detailed description of the parole of the educated people Bangalore/ mysore area of Karnataka which is emulated in films and radio. Hence, it is based neither on caste nor on regional dialects of Kannada in sensu stricto. It includes a vast and useful Bibliography of books articles prepared painstakingly. The well-organized exhaustive index enables the reader to have easy reference.

Professor Harold schiffman was awarded many Fellowships, Awards and Grants; these are the following lists of Fellowships, Awards and Grants:

1) NDEA Title VI in Tamil, Kannada, and Telugu: Universities of Chicago, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Michigan State: 1963-5, 1968.
2) American Institute of Indian Studies: Junior Fellowship, 1965-66; Senior Fellowship 1976, Short-term Senior Fellowship, summer, 1978.
3) American Council of Learned Societies/Social Science Research Council: Grant for Research on Language Loyalty in Sri Lanka.
4) Graduate School Research Fund, University of Washington: Spring quarter1976. ``Language Loyalty in the German-American Church."
5) Office of Education, Institute of International Studies: Contract Reader for Advanced Spoken Tamil, 1971; Grant Reference Grammar of Spoken Kannada, 1979.
6) National Endowment for the Humanities: Three-year Grant for English-Tamil Dictionary, 1984-88. Smithsonian Institution: Grant for support of English-Tamil Dictionary in India, 1984-88. Graduate School Research Fund R.A.-ship, Autumn-winter, 1985-86.
7) Council for International Exchange of Scholars (Fulbright): Three-month award for research in Singapore and Malaysia, 1994.
8) The HenryR.Luce Foundation: Luce Professorship in Language Learning, University of Pennsylvania.
Professional Memberships
1) Linguistic Society of America; International Linguistic Association; Dravidian
2) Linguistic Association; Linguistic Society of India; American Anthropological Association
Professional Offices Held
1. Committee, SEASSI 1993— Chair Language Committee, South Asia Regional Council, AAS 1974—6
2. Chair Language Committee, American Institute of Indian Studies 1978-3
3. Trustee American Institute of Indian Studies 1979—83
4. Member South Asia Council, Association for Asian Studies 1982--85
5. Vice-President International Association of Tamil Research 1987—
6. Member Language Advisory Committee, SEASSI 1991--95
Chair Language (Advisory)95
A Bibliography of Professor Schiffman Harold’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).
1. Dravidian Phonological Systems, (with Carol Eastman, Eds.) 1975. South Asian Studies Program, Institute for Comparative and Foreign Area Studies, and University of Washington Press, pp. i-xxii, 1-409.
2. Language and Society in South Asia. 1982. (With Michael Shapiro.) Delhi: Matilal Banarsidass. Pp.i-x, 1-283.
3. A Reference Grammar of Spoken Kannada. 1983. Seattle: University of Washington Press and School of International Studies Publications on Asia, Vol. 39. Pp. i-xx, 1-182.
4. Geolinguistics: Language Dynamics and Ethno-Linguistic Geography. 1991. Translation of La Géographie des Langues. (Roland Breton, Les Presses Universitaires de France, 1983.) Les Presses de l'Université d'Ottawa. Pp. i-vii, 1-155.
5. Linguistic Culture and Language Policy. (1996) Politics of Language Series, Rout ledge (London). Pp. i-x, 1-356.
Selected Articles:
1. 1968: Morphophonemics of the Kannada verb, Glossa 2.2: 191-212
2. 1965: Morphophonemics in Kannada, in seminar on Grammatical Theories in Kannada, mysore
3. 1975: ``On the Ternary Contrast in Dravidian Coronal Stops." in H. Schiffman and C. M. Eastman (eds.) Dravidian Phonological Systems, pp. 69-85...
4. 1991: Kannada. In Wm. Bright, (ed.), Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Vol. II, pp. 266-268. Oxford: the Clarendon Press.
William McCormack
William McCormack is one of the renowned scholars of Kannada language among western scholars who have contributed to Kannada Linguistics. His contribution to Kannada is considerably great in the areas of dialectology, sociolinguistics and language teaching. The focus of William McCormack’s study on Dharwar Kannada is significant in order to understand, the way in which language variation takes place in a multicultural and multilingual speech repertoire. Subsequently, McCormack’s study of Dharwar Kannada indicates substantial borrowing of Brahman forms by non-Brahmans, at the same time, in the region of north Karnataka urban non-Brahmans with white-collar jobs or good education speak like Brahmans.
A Bibliography of ProfessorWilliamMcCormack’s Books and Papers (Related to only Kannada).
1960: Social dialects in Dharwar Kannada. In: Ferguson and Gumperz (Ed).
1962: Elementary Kannada in three volumes with M G Krishnamurthy, S Krishnamurthy, S B Prasad and ShantaRam
1966: Kannada: A Cultural Introduction to the Spoken Styles of the Language. Madison: The University of Wisconsin press.
1968: Occupation and Residence in relation to Dharwar dialects. In: Singer and Cohn (Ed).
1968: Social dialect in Dharwar Kannada. In: Sebock (Ed) in 1969.
References:
1974: Indian Linguistics, vol.35: No: 4, Decan College, Poona
1977: International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics, Vol: VI, No.1, DLA. Keral
1987: Ibid, Vol: XVI No.1
1989: Ibid, Vol: XVIII No.1
1997: Ibid, Vol: XXVI No.1
2000: Ibid, Vol: XXIX No 2
2003: Ibid, Vol: XXXII No.2
Madtha, William: 1988: Kannada Linguistics so for (1894-1986) A Rapid Survey and Analysis, Journal of the Karnataka University, Vol: XXXII, Dharwar
Mathew K M: 1994: Rev. F. Kittel: Ondu Samagra Adhayana, Kittel College, Dharwar
Madtha, William etl(Ed):1998: A Dictionary with Mission, The Karnataka Theological Research Institute, And Mangalore
1998: Dravidian Encyclopedia. Vol: 1 &2, DLA, Keral
Websites: of William Bright, Harold. Schiffman and Wilkin Encyclopedia

THE IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON INDIAN LANGUAGES:

THE LINGUISTIC CONSEQUENCES AND REALITIES




Meti Mallikarjun
Sahyadri college,
Shimoga
metimallikarjun@yahoo.com


Abstract

This paper intends to explore the interactions between globalization and linguistic consequences i.e. linguistic hegemony, shift, danger, myth and realities in the domain of higher education and its related networks. The impact of British period, and the introduction of English in India, on the linguistic map of this country, is not distinctly visible but have left an impact on the language politics and intra-national communication network of India... The dynamics of language of power it is not confined to India alone as well... Similar language planning situations exists in other former-colonies. The freedom struggle of India is different from the freedom struggle of other colonies. In all these cases, language was part of the agenda of the struggle. In other words, managing linguistic / cultural diversity is one of the central challenges of our time. The challenges are part of historic process of social change, of struggle for cultural and linguistic freedom, of new frontiers in the advance of human freedom and democracy. The important events that need to be studied are the policy decision of the colonizer and neo-colonizer. The language polices, on the one hand to be a compromise among the language of the elite (English), the national language (i.e. to be Hindi) and the regional language. This paper highlights some of the important policy decisions taken by an imperialists and neo-colonizer – in the against of globalization and economic liberalization...

Introduction: the beginnings of English hegemony

The spread and rise of English presupposes and entails the existence and subsequent dissemination of a language that not only took firm roots in its own country but also through various man oeuvres could and did establish itself in other parts of the world as well. English today, it is spoken by several hundred million people spanning five continents. It functions in different kinds of societies as a mother tongue, a second language, a vehicle of officialdom, a medium of education, as a language for science and technology, business, and commerce. It is also functioning as a lingua franca- a language used among people who have no other tongue in common and in same places; it has provided the base for pidgins and Creoles. It is also spoken by people who use more than two or three languages in the course of their daily lives, and it has came to symbolize many different and often sensitive issues and institutions in different areas : education , literacy, social mobility, economic advancement Christianity and colonial and neo-colonial dominance. Today English in the Indian subcontinent is dominating in many crests and colors. Its glaring proliferation, to the remotest corners of the country is covering virtually every segment of the plural society. Particularly, after the colonial rule ended nearly six decades ago, has upset the calculation of those aspiring to install indigenous languages in the place of the language of the colonial masters (Khubachandani : 1996). In such an expanded scenario of communication, English in many developing countries is looked up on as a vehicle of secondary modernization, leading to sarcastic claims that “the Raj dead is more powerful than the Raj alive”. The place of English in India in any meaningful way unless we spell out some of the problems associated with conceptualilizing ‘language’ and ‘multilingualism’ and their relationship to power in society. It is also a marker of identity, and often its role, as an identity marker may be more powerful than its role as a means of communication. In very important ways, it also structures our universe and according to some philosophers such as Wittgenstein, it delimits the structure of our thought as well. In fact, we also need to ask the reasons why, in a global context, a particular language is associated with power and prestige, and how it becomes imperative for trade, commerce, knowledge, and even for revolt so that even the most enlightened minds have began to suspect the viability of using their own languages towards these ends. The establishment of English language as cultural, political, economical, educational, entities in India by replacing Indian languages is one of the crucial factors, for analyzing the positions of the modern Indian languages. The discourse of ‘English establishment’ in India, of course is one elitist attitude of common people in order to adopt the kind of social mask, which pretends to be modernizing life.
Macaulay’s recommendation in the 1835 English education act made English ‘the language of government, education and advancement’ (Krishnaswamy 1983) one of his recommendations was that ‘all the funds appropriated for the purpose of education would be best employed on English education alone (Aggarwal 1984:4). It was decided that all funds would henceforth be utilized for importing to the population a knowledge of English literature and science through the medium of the English language (big id : 15). English education continues to offer in the missionary institutions, which had been operating, from the beginning of the nineteenth century. The language English in India has been associated, from the beginning with career advancement, social mobility, western knowledge and status in society. Even after in dependence many people felt that elite, with an English education as one of its defining features, simply replace the British colonizers. It is important to notice that the reaction came not only from the elite but also from the common people who might have had access to education. In an ‘economy of complicity and guilt ’ (suleri : 1992)it is rightly pointed out that the desire to learn English to intensified; for instance, the British Indian association of the north western provinces, Aligarh, wrote to the governor – general of India in council on august 1867.
“We have said that in offering our present petition our object is not to revive the dead learning and refinement of Asia but to supplant all this by the introduction of the truer and more recently acquired knowledge of Europe… At present an acquaintance with the higher branches of knowledge can obtained only by a study of the English language, and it is this which present the greatest obstacle to the general and rapid propagation of useful knowledge in the country (Naik : 1963 : 23). By the beginning of the 20th century the association of English with power and position had become firmly establish in India. In the same way Bhatia (1940 : 104) argues that ‘ the study of English deserves the place of honor in our curricula not because of its practical usefulness as an means of livelihood but also because it has been and still is to a very considerable extent the only lingua – franca for the educated class of India’.
Most of the Indian languages are rich linguistically as well as in literature. However, none of them plays any significant role as a medium of transnational communication. The only language that plays a significant mediating role in transnational information flow is English. Another language, Hindi (to be national language), is used at some extent in certain functional domains. The forces of history have made English the major medium of transnational communication in Asia. English uses extensively for communication between English speaking and non-English speaking countries, among non-English speaking and in some cases within a non-English speaking country. In a large culturally diverse country like India English is using as a common language for communication between different linguistic regions within the country.
The colonial experience is also responsible factor for de-establishing the modern Indian languages in the modern contexts, because of the colonial impact, English took place in India, no doubt, but the resistances and consistencies of Indian linguistic capacity ‘ has been lowering ....it is the creation of colonialism. As a result, this has been continuing in the globalizing process, at the same time, ‘the linguistic encroachment’ has taken place in the process of neo-colonialism. Therefore, the semantics of globalization and neo-colonialism is creating new registers to vanish the modern Indian languages.
These are analytical factors for understanding the impact of globalization, Colonialism and neo-colonialism on modern Indian languages. Conceptualizing English, of course, is very difficult in Indian cultural context, though, English is replacing the vernaculars of India.
English as power, knowledge and capital; in the domains of political, economical, social and educational this functions as hegemony on modern Indian languages. The status, role, and functions of English in the socio linguistic context of each English using third-world countries is not properly understood, is conveniently ignored. The consequences of this attitude are that the third-world countries are slowly realizing that un-establishment and unprotected native vernaculars of their. The perceptions of postcolonial discourse are again depending upon English, why, English is not merely a language; it is an instrument for low, a political register/discourse it is a power more than that English is the signifier of modernity. The spread of English language is more comparatively with any language in India and outside the India. As for as Indian linguistic management is concerned, is not prepared for any scientific or technological usages/adoptable/adjustable, whereas, English language is prepared for all sorts of usages in any given linguistic capacity. The manifestations of modernity/modernized social groups are crucial in order to understand the attitudes of English language and its development in modernized domains. In the process of globalization, the concepts of development are nothing but, they are the economical and political benefits (development), everything looked in terms of economical aspects, In fact, economical benefits are the real agendas of modern time. Now-a-days, lifestyle is depending on only economical theory.
Whether it is economics, defense, science or diplomacy, language plays a significant role. Language is the most important tool in understanding one’s collaborates, competitors and adversaries and developing coping ability to meet the challengers of a world in flux. In the present day world, linguistic consciousness directly affects global realities. It has been primary focus of this paper to look into the connections of English between development, capitalism and dependence, and to make a strong case for the use of Indian languages in science and technology all levels of higher education for the realization of potentials of these languages (modern Indian languages). It is critical because it not only tries to raise consciousness among its speakers but also aims at showing up connections, which are seemingly hidden form people such as the connections between language, power and ideology. These connections have been characterized with reference to English in order to understand its hegemonic function of science, technology and information system. It is to be noted that English in India is a symbol of linguistic centralism. Where as the numerous Indian languages are seen to represent ‘linguistic regionalism’ (Kapilkapoor: 1994). The colonial language is constitutionally recognized even in the decolonized nation. I.e. English which has replaced the native vernaculars from the functional domains completely. Only two / three languages are taking ‘linguistic encroachment’, the kind of thinking is emerging like, if there is no English, there would not be any knowledge in the state or nation.
It is obvious that, the agendas or manifestations of globalization are vanishing of the native languages and cultural values, at the same time, devaluing them. Subsequently, it tries to establish its languages as superior than others, to understand colonalized and globalized minds. The hegemonic languages are the appropriate instrument. This, globalization will create a kind of environment for perishing the native and pluricultural entities and core values of neo-colonalized nation / state. This focuses on the issues related with ideology of science and technology, its repressive functions and forms of state country and the factors that have contributed to the ideology and politics of science. In as much as language place a pervasive, subtle, and complex role in the construction of ideological formations and structure, the use of language (particularly with reference to English) on the exercise of ideological function of science policy, education and language planning in the developing countries. The developing countries have accepted the dominant position and status of English in science and technological education. Its purpose was to instill the right “English value” in colonized subjects and to project a vision of all was finest and most admirable in English culture. Thomas Babington Macaulay presented in his famous “minutes on education”. That one of the most efficient ways for colonial authority to legitimize its cultural ideology was to perpetuate the myth of English high culture through the valorization of specific kinds of literary texts.
Through this education as theory, the language and there by the culture of the colonies origin was filtered down to percolate in the minds of the colonized subjects thus establishing a hierarchy.
The early 19th century politics also promoted the founding of a Standard English. Language was used as an emblem of a bond that brought together otherwise disunited cultural factions. This striving for uniformity culminated in linguistic such as Daniel Jones advocating the education pronunciation as a standard against which other forms were judged as being deviant, uncouth and educationally subnormal. His English pronouncing dictionary (1917) was a case in point; such linguistic dictates functioned to exclude people from power and influence in terms of class and ethnic differences of dialect and pronunciation, So much for the politics of centering a standard. Consequently, education became a less effective means for enlightenment ideology to be mediated by the Indian languages. In all sections, English become the dominant languages of education, science and technology and there fore dominant medium of modernization through education by the middle of the nineteenth century. i.e. in period of 40 years from the acceptance of the policy of public education by the colonial government in India (from, Annamalai 1998). Subsequently, globalization sectors have come for renewal in this time, spread of the Euro-American’s knowledge came to be associated with material improvement, and not just with moral improvement of the third world countries, it was inevitable for certain Indian elite caste / groups for accepting English to continue their hegemony, and to establish their elite status. In such a situation, the cultural / linguistic establishment has to see beyond its borders for further establishments of neo-colonialism. The idea was to introduce a feeling that there would be an increase in the average income, and poor nations would prosper more rapidly than the rich leading to the birth of the ‘global village’ where market integration and prosperity would be the main trends. This new dispensation was termed as a “neo-liberal “or as it is commonly known to the public. “Globalism” or “globalization “this was classical liberation new relabeled as ‘the new economy which puts the U.S.A and Britain as “the privileged vanguard of an evolutionary process that applies to all nations. “ (Chomsky : 2004) however this was nothing but absolute deception and its claims of ushering in technological developments and a win, win perspective were a cover up for the underline agenda to advance the interest of the Anglo-American political elites at the expense of others. This white man’s burden is nothing but hypocrisy or racism. It is critically important to understand that the doctrine of globalism, in other words of Johansson, a kind of intellectual sedative that lulls and distracts its third world victims, while rich countries cripple them, ensuring that these will never be able to challenge the imperial powers” (Jeremy fox : 2004 : Chomsky and globalization). The dominance of English is unassaible in the field of science and technological education, and research; it is in the process of assuring the some function, status, position in literature, translation, business, industry and international relations.

The new economic policy; the fate of Indian languages:

As Carl marks rightly pointed out, “All the ruling ideas of a society are the ideas of ruling class” It is very adequate in the context of neo-colonialism. Consequently, this is not exceptional to linguistic situation of a nation /state. The myth, reality and danger of the globalization / neo-liberalism are to be questioned because of the economical benefits, most of the south and south Asian countries are loosing inherited and indigenous heritages, at the same time, their linguistic positions are in endanger situation. Economic liberalization covers man’s aspects of policy, but the central issue at stake is the relative role of the state and market in the operation and management of the national economy. The global arrangements of power and domination have undergone a basic change and if has exercised a profound impact not only on the Indian path of capitalist development but also an every of society including social science and (languages) Linguistic intellectuals. It is to be noted in relation to linguistic centralism with the drawl of the British from India. The language question naturally came to the fore, in which the central issue was the role and status of English vis-à-vis Indian languages, both vernaculars and classical. The vested interest of the ’English Knowing’ ruling class demanded the perpetuation of English so that the vast majority of people would continue to remain outside the privileged power structure. Foucault’s post-structuralist account of power focuses on the ‘Micro techniques’ of power built into the capillaries of social life which have the effect of normalizing modern life.
The new Economic policy (NEP) which opened up the Indian economy in a big way for economic liberalization in July 1991, marks an interesting swing from “stagflation” to growthflation” (imtiaz:1998). Although Mr. Manamohan Singh, the then Finance minister, had presaged a better turn and an optimistic economic scenario, he had also cautioned that the out comes reform be ensured immediately (ibid). There is, therefore a need to look in the impact of NEP a languages (Linguistic capacity) is recorded as the potential investment of national development, language mainly deals with improvements of human resources, it is through language that a nation transmits its heritage, recreates it culture, strengthens its economy and conserve its values. It is the means of individual excellence. For decision related to globalization and other aspects of NEP have certain linguistic consequences and thus, have bearing on linguistic communities, the question of linguistic survival is the major problem in the era of globalization, because linguistic diversity / linguistic repertoire is one of the beauties of the nation like India. There fore the preservation maintenance of linguistic diversity and repertoire of India is necessary. This view emerged form strong socio political compulsions related to the desire for political independence closely linked with linguistic independence. In the process of the globalization, economically enriched countries like America are colonizing the whole universe / world at the same time, informing diversified linguistic and cultural system in to one. This imperialist attitude is trying to bring linguistic and cultural centralism. By making all the universal language as ‘regional languages’ because of multinational corporations, if at all one wants to get a job or employment in the given sectors, English is necessary and English is the only language, which provides economical support. Education domain is one that can be dominated by industrialist to safeguard their marketing agendas / manifestation. The capitalists’ marketing pressure is regulating the education system for its own use, the way in which it was to exploit the education system. Only 10 % of the elite class people, those who are advantageous of globalization are manufacturing the consent ‘of majority people, for language policy and planning as well as its implication for the efficacy of planning and economic development, social change and modernization. it is proved that science and technological policy should be holistic in nature integrating the development at both the economic and social levels as well as educational, linguistic and cultural levels. The mythology was built up around the role and functions of English in which the central metaphor is the metaphor of window: English is the language of knowledge (science and technology) liberal, modernity / modern thinking; English is our window on the world. English is the library language and English is the language of economy advancement in the sense dissemination of enlightenment ideas through the medium of English in education thus creates a new urban native elite which as access to wealth and power. Modernization it may be seen is intricately connected with the acquisition of material power and wealth, the fact that Indians tended to negotiate with the English education as means of economic advancement more than, of enlightenment was viewed with alarm by the mangers of the enlightenment of agenda. Lord Ellenbourough exclaimed in the British parliament that English means rupees. (From Annamalai’s work: 1998) by considering the above insights the role and functions of modern Indian languages in the societal modernization of India and the extended of modernization the underwent themselves in this role has to be justified to understand their position in the era of globalization and neo-colonialism.
The neo-colonialism is transferring all most all south Asian countries in the form of internationalism’, where that could and did above to establish one language i.e. English and one social system i.e. informing the universal cultures. This is because of the fact that, growing economic and cultural interdependence, the global world is riven with divergent concerns conflicting interest of state and in-equalities of wealth and power. Linguistic consequences leading to loss, death or shift in the use of language and their subsequent marginalization will be realized within neo-colonialism model of language economics. Neo-colonialism model spreads through satellite T.V and other media for occupying the cultural capital both in terms of linguistic and economic benefits. in other words, the overall well being of an individual and global interdependence of the people are unanimously agreed as a solution to the dangerous polarization between people and countries benefiting from the system and those as more passive recipients of its effects. Linguistic inequality is one of the major challenger us of the globalization. In the sense, globalization is not only continuing to the economical aspects, free marketing and economical liberalization at the same time, it rise to vanish linguistic and cultural diversity. Countries like India, co-exits with multilingualism and multiculturalism; these are the unique features of the national integration. To protect and preserve the linguistic and cultural diversity is necessary. It is very unfortunate development that English has become one pan-Indian language that would promote national integration as no other languages would! so by this logic while the Indian languages, as regional languages promote divisiveness and fissiparous tendencies, English, a foreign language promotes unity and integration ! This argument for linguistic centralism had on inherent appeal for the intellectual (Kapoor: 1994) at a time when an impatient unitary centralism was the dominant political idealist.
Conclusion:
This paper has not tried to deal with the theoretical aspects of globalization, infect, trying to focus an influences, impact, impositions of globalization on modern Indian languages. Through out the paper, the discussions of this paper are interacting between English and modern Indian languages in order to understand the linguistic influences, impacts impositions and realities of globalization on Indian vernaculars are linguistic heritage. In which how does an economic factor play an important role in order to globalize the third world countries. Thus, the realities and consequences of globalization on modern Indian languages are very crucial to justify the impact of globalization on linguistic entities of nation /state because of economical liberalization and supportive economic systems of America / Euro-American countries. Their fore, this paper could and did able to identify the hidden agenda of neo-colonialism / globalization. This has proven how language can be significant criteria to colonize the minds of the third world victims. In the process of globalization and neo-colonialism of any given country, language become an instruments, language is one, which could do many thinks, in the sense, language is power knowledge, law, education, Market, business and administration. In that was, English has be came an International language. Now, in every walk of life of the third world Countries’ People, English is everything, in the sense, English for modernity, science, technology, rationality and better life. It is very interesting to note here that, what Kuvempu said about English; He opposed English as a medium of instruction in schooling, at the same time, he welcomed English as a language of modernity and rationality; and he defines, the importance, value and scope of English and its knowledge expansion in India, especially for Dalits and Sudras. If one thinks for vanishing, the English like British from India is to be considered as “Desh Drohi” (Kuvempu: 1977:15). These arguments of Kuvempu, extend their logical extension to saying, because of English and English education in India, there are Kuvempu, Ambedkar and like such personalities could emerge from Dalits/Sudras communities in India. In spite of the consequences of English, the realities of this language are taken into consideration among Dalits/Sudras and elite class people in India.
English has became an expression for many ‘English educated’ community, in order to establish their nationalism and to go beyond the modernity for their further rediscoveries to manage their ‘linguistic and cultural hegemony’ at one hand, and the other hand, in the post- colonialism, the intellectual community has started writing in English for writing back to the Empire in his/her language. Now, English has occupied the place of Indian language. Consequently, this language has became cultural language in Pan- Indian situation, today, if one writes in English, he/she becomes “Indian writer”, at the same time, gets name and fame at the world wide (E.g.: Salman Rushdie, Aurandhati Roy, etc). Where as, one who writes in Modern Indian languages, he/she is to be considered as only ‘regional writer’. The value and power of language of English is very powerful than all Modern Indian languages. Therefore, English is the cultural capital in all the functional domains of the Indian Society.






References:


c Aggarwala J.C: 1984: Landmarks in the history of Modern Indian education, Vikas, Delhi.
c Annamalai: 2001 : Managing Multilingualism in India, Sage publication Delhi
c Chalmers, Johnson: 2004: Sorrows of Empire, Cambridge.
c Dua.H.R: 2001: Science policy Education and language Planning, Yashoda publications, my sore.
c Geoff & Others: 2001: Understanding Foucault: Motilala Banarasidass publishers, New Delhi.
c Jeremy Fox: 2004: Chomsky and Globalization, Cambridge University press, Cambridge.
c Kapil Kapoor: 1994: Language, Linguistics and Literature, Academic Foundation, Delhi.
c Khubachandani L.M: 1996: English snow flakes in India Tropics, South Asian Language Review, Vol-6, No l.
c Krishnaswamy. N: 1983: Understanding values, TEIL, and the third world, in ‘Readings in English as an International language, Oxford.
c Kuvempu: 1977: “Namage bekagiruva English” Vicharasahitya (Ed) by G.S. Shivarudrappa and K.V. Rajagopal University of Bangalore, Bangalore.
c Neil Smith: 1999: Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals, Cambridge University press, Cambridge.
c Pattanayaka.D.P: 1981: Language and social issues; Mysore University, Mysore.
c R.Chenni &Siraj Ahmed(Ed) 2004: Jagatikarana: Ondu Samagra Manthan Sahitya Academy, Bangalore.
c Wittgenstein. L: 1953: Philosophical Investigations, Trans, GEM, And Ascombe.