SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL by

KAMIL ZVELEBIL
Praha

0.1. The material. The analysis and description is based on data colleered between 1958-1962 in direct field-work with eleven Ceylon Tamil speakers. These informants must be classified into four groups: a. speakers from Jaffna, b. from Trincomalee, c. from Batticaloa, d. speakers of mixed common Ceylonese. a. JAFFNAinformants: (1) K. Sithamparanathan, male, age 24, from Tunnale, Jaffna; (2) K. Sivasithamparam, male, age 24, High Caste Tamil, from Karaveddy, Jaffna; (3) K. P. Balasingham, age 21, vel.l.dla, from Karaveddy, Jaffna. b. TRINCOMALEE informant: (4) Tilakam Selvamani Vadivelu, female, age 17, ef. w0.3. c. BATTICALOAinformant: (5) K. Manikkam, male, age 23, Hindu velldla, born in Kannankuda, Batticaloa. d. Speakers of MIXEO COMMONCEYLONESE:(6) Kokilam Subbiah, female, age 32, Hindu veil.dr[a, born in South India, living in Jaffna, Colombo, Badulla, cf. w0.3. (7) M. Tambinayakam, male, age 22, Catholic vel.l.al.a,born in ftrkava_r_ru_rai,Jaffna, who had lived in Colombo for ten years. (8) T. Gunaraja, male, age 21, veilS[a, born in Malaya from Jaffna parents, who had lived in Jaffna and Colombo since 1950. These data were supplemented by material gathered from three other informants picked up among Ceylonese Tamilians studying in Madras and Trivandrum. The material consists of several hundred test-sentences and a few texts, as well as of lists of test-words and stretches of conversation and narratives, tape-recorded on Grundig, speed 3,75 inch/s, and on Start Tesla ANP 402, speed 4,76 cm/s. 0.2. Way of presentation. The material is presented so that the typical, selected features of phonology, morphology and vocabulary of the three

114

KAMILZVELEBIL

territorial subdialects (Jaffna, Trincomalee, Batticaloa) plus mixed Ceylonese are given first, and then Ceylonese Tamil as a major regional dialect is described in its diagnostic features. The treatment is purely synchronic and descriptive with only very occasional excursions into historical and comparative spheies. 0.3. Bibliographic Preview. Recently, several papers were published directly or indirectly concerned with Ceylonese Tamil. They are K. Kanapathi Pillai's "The Jaffna Dialect of Tamil", lnd. Ling., Turner Jub. Vol., I (1958), pp. 219-227; Susumu Kuno's "Phonemic Structure of Colloquial Tamil", Gengo Kenkyu, No. 34 (1958), p. 41ff.; my own "Dialects of Tamil, I", Ar. Or., 27 (1959); pp. 286-96 contain the material for Trincomalee dialect; my own "Dialects of Tamil II App.", Ar. Or., 28 (1960), pp. 220-4 with what I then called Jaffna material but today would rather prefer to call mixed common Ceylonese. Further cf. Kamil Zvelebil, "Notes on Two Dialects of Ceylon Tamil", in Trans. Ling. Circle of Delhi, Dr. Siddhesw. Parma Jub. Vol. (1959-60), pp. 2836; M. Andronov, Razgovornyj tamil'skij jazyk i ego dialekty (Moskva, 1962). For a historical treatment of some important aspects of Ceylonese Tamil of. F. B. J. Kuiper, "Note on Old Tamil and Jaffna Tamil" in IIJ, vol. V, No. 1 (1962), pp. 52-64. M. Shanmugam Pillai's Tamil Dialect in Ceylon was made accessible to me in manuscript form, very kindly sent by the author in 1959. Cf. also S. Thananjayarajasingham, "Some Phonological Features of the Jaffna Dialect of Tamil", Univ. of Ceylon Rev., XX, 2 (1962), pp. 292-302.

1. JAFFNA 1.1. Phonology

1.11. Vowels1 1.11.11. One of the most striking features of Jaffna Ta. vocalism is the realization o f / a / initially and in first syllables very frequently as [~i] to [a], i.e., compared with most continental dialects and common CT which have [A], the Jaffna (in particular) and Ceylonese (in general) /a/ in this position is much more fronted and low. ~ Instances: [~tVA.1,
Space and time do not permit me to give a full description of the entire phonemic and phonetic systems of the different subdialects. Only typical, characteristic, selected features are given, which may prove diagnostic for this or that sub-dialect. Cf. my paper "The Vowels of Colloquial Tamil", Ar. Or., 31 (1963), p. 227.

SOMEFEATURESOF CEYLONTAMIL

115

avAn, amm~i:], LT aval., avan_, ammd and [padAm, pitTey, marAm], LT pa!am, pakai, maram. 1.11.12. This shift to the front is sometimes accompanied by a slight rising, so that often we have, in the same position, [~] to [re], i.e. a central to front higher-low /a/, cf. [~enbm, kh~e.dfimpA~ey, m~rom] LT anpu, kalumpaccai, maram. 1.11.13. Sometimes [~] to [a~] occurs in other positions, too, cf. [pitT,|, ma~.l, ~pp~e] for pakal, makal., ipp6. 1.11.2. L o n g / a : / which in all dialects of continental Ta. as well as in Continental colloquial Tamil is always central to back, unrounded, low, is very often, in Jaffna, central to front, higher-low [~:] to [~e:], cf. [~:m] drn, [nia3gA.l~:r] n~hkal, ydr, [VA0~l~:r] vantdr, [po:xmr~e:r] ptki.rdr, [ave.lab:r| aval. dr. This feature was very consistent especially with informant No. 1.~ 1.11.3. Initial /e/, /e:/ occur regularly with only very slight or no palatal onglide at all, contrary to most continental dialects and CT, cf. [ennfi.deyA, enAkkm, e,lfimb~v~:n, ennA seyyApo:re:] for LT en_n_ut.aiya, e_nakku, e.lumpuv~_n, e_nn_aceyya ptki_rdy. 1.11.4. / u / i n Anlaut or in first syllables remains mostly unchanged, contrary to continental substandard and CT change o f / u / > /o/ in certain neighbourhood, cf. [ku.lA.n~le] kul_antai, [Ul3gA,le ] uhka[ai, though the same speaker used [o.leykki~trh:n] for u_laikki_n.r~. 1.11.5. i before _r is pronounced nearly always as [I]; rarely as [e], very exceptionally as [a]. This is one of the typical Jaffna features. Cf. [dsAnnA1 tlrAn~ttu:] ja_n_nal tirantu, [~IrAppA.t.tAttU] ti_rappat.t.atu, but once [torAkkOm] by the same informant. 1.11.6. Sometimes/o:/is realized as a more or less unrounded, meanmid [8:], cf. [pS:y] for pty. 1.11.7. The (graphic) sequence -ai which is more or less regularly monophthongized in continental dialects, remains mostly unchanged medially; in Auslaut, there seems to be free variation between the sequence [-ey] and the vowel I-e|. Instances: medially LT nd[aikku; Jaffna na:[eykki ,,, na:[eykku; LT i_nraikku Jaffna inteykki ~ inteykku; LT a_laittirukkira[ Jaffna a[eytlirikkira:[; finally LT t6cai Jaffna to:je; LT ki_lamai Jaffna ki[ame; LT ava_nai Jaffna avane; LT illai Jaffna ille; but (the same informants) LT m(cai Jaffna me:jey; LT kalai Jaffna ka:lay. 4 1.11.8. F i n a l / m / a n d / n / i s lost and the preceding vowel more or less 3 K. Sithamparanathan. 4 CL my "Notes on Two Dialects of Ceylon Tamil", p. 33, 2.3.

116

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

strongly nasalized in all continental substandard dialects and in CT. This important phenomenon is totally absent in Jaffna Tamil. All my Jaffna informants used forms like [marAm, to:.t.tAm, ne:rAm, 13isut k6:t..t~m p&lum, po:rom, /t:ru~umft~/om] for LT maram, t6t.t.am, nOram, pisk6t.t.um pdlurn, p6kir6m, drumukam, and [aven, po:ve:n, geixIrAn, maTAn, n/t:n, m~t:.t.t/t:n] for LT ava_n,p6vO, ceyki.r@, makan_, n~, mdt.t.~ . 1.12. Consonants 1.12.1. Intervocalic plosives 5 1.12.11. /k/. The infoImants from Jaffna pronounced the variants of intervocalic /k/ in the following ratio: voiced allophones [7, 7 h, g] : unvoiced [x,k h] = 5 : 2. Among both the voiced and voiceless pronunciation there were some peculiar variants to be heard, namely [7h, g] and [kh]. The most usual voiced allophone o f / k / was, however, the voiced fricative [7] just as in continental Tamil. All my informants for Jaffna had this sound in their phonetic inventory, cf. [SUTAm, payael, paq'ey, tATA.dIII , mhTi.r~Si, mAy/t:n/~:.dtu, n~t:TAmma:, pus~tAThm] for LT cukam,

pakal, pakai, takat.u, makilcci, makdndt.u, ndkammd, pustakam.

One of the informants, 6 however, preferred the voiced I'LOSIVE [g] in this position: [SUgAm, /tghm]. The same allophone was occasionally heard with the other informants, e.g. [vi:rAb/t:gtu], and I suspect that the variation between the fricative and occlusive in this position is to a considerable extent conditioned by different force and muscular tension (fortis : lenis opposition) and by the fact whether the pronunciation is careful and slow, or careless and fast. Rarely, the allophone [7h] occurred, and this only in one item, viz. [gu.dtuTh/t:.dtu:] cut.ukdt.u "burning ground". The most frequent allophone among the voiceless variants was undoubtedly Ix], a clear voiceless fricative: [mAXAn, mAxu.dhm, muxAm, su.dfix/t:.di] for LT makan, makut.am, mukam, cut.ukdt.u. This [x], too, was familiar to all Jaffna informants. [k hI occurred three times intervocalically, always on the boundary between two component members in a compound, cf. [~u.dmkh/t:.dtu:, pA.l.likhu:.dhm, t~A~/~:lkhA.n~io:r]. 5 This paragraph, too, contains a purely descriptive and synchronic statement. No historical or comparative discussion of the matter is attempted. Mr. Balasingham. I met with an obstinately consequent [g] allophone of intervocalic/k] even in Madras, pronounced by an informant who could not be suspected of any Ceylonese affinities or relations. I hope I shall have opportunity to elaborate this matter in the future.

SOMEFEATURESOF CEYLONTAMIL

117

Thus the most frequent voiced and voiceless variants of intervocalic / k / a r e , in Jaffna Tamil, D'] and [x] respectively. 1.12.12. /c/. Apart from variants current in continental Tamil a peculiar voiced [z] occurred quite frequently in the speech of one informant: 7 [k~.du6/t:zi] for kat.utdci, [ve:l~z~yxIrAn] for vFlai ceyki.r~. 1.12.13. /.t/ was always - with a single important exception - realized intervocalically as a voiced stop: [pA.dAm, mu.dIvm:, vi.duclAley, ennfi.deyA, vi:d.tu:] for pat.am, mut.ivu, vit.utalai, en_nut.aiya, v~t.u. The exception was the genitive-possessive suffix -.ta ,,~ -.te in e.g. [h:r.t^] for ydrut.aiya, or [m/t:m/t:n.tA] for mdm~ut.aiya. 1.12.14. Analogically to the pattern of the main variants [Y, g] and Ix] of intervocalic/k/, the speech of Jaffna has the following variants of intervocalic/t/: [6, ~1] and Lt]. The ratio is somewhat different from that of the variants o f / k / , viz. [6] : [r : [0] ~ [t] = 7 : 5 : 1. Cf. instances for [6]: [mA6Ore, thAlevi6i, sey6i, m/t:6iri, A6fi] for LT maturai, talaiviti, ceyti, matiri, atu; examples of [~1], an apical voiced stop: [mA~tippm, mAct~rey, vi.dfidAley, IdO, pATOdi] for matippu, maturai, vit.utalai, itu, pakuti. Instances of [0] ~ [t]: [po:0o] in very fast speech for LT p6ki_ratu, CT/po:ku.tu/; cf. further [pey0tu] for peytu, [tAyeym seyt~] for LT tayavuceytu. It] occurred only in this single instance. 1.12.15. This pattern reappears with intervocalic /p/. The most frequent variant is a voiced fricative [13]; much less frequent is a voiced plosive [b]; and the unvoiced variant is extremely rare. The ratio is approximately 7 : 3 : less than 1. Instances of [13]: [ko:13Am, VlI3As/t:rAm, pirAl3AInm, tAI3it:lkhAn~to:r, ayy~:13e:r] for LT kSpam, vipacdram, pirapalam, tapdlkant6r, ayyd pFr. Instances of [b]: [ko:bam, so:bAm, thAbfi:lkAo~o:r] for k~pam, c~pam, tapdlkant6r; for [p] [ennfi.deyape:r]. The intervocalic plosives /k, .t, t, p/ are thus, in the Jaffna Tamil of my informants, realized mostly as VOICED alternants, usually FRICATIVE [7, 6, [~], VOICED PLOSIVES occur intervocalically with /k, t/, and /p/ [g, ~l, b] and of course with/t./ [.d] ; VOICELESSintervocalic variants [x] or [kh], [.t], [t] or [0], [p] are much less frequent. Nearly all quoted variants occur in the speech of Jaffna speakers in FREE VARIATION. The same item is now realized with voiced, then with voiceless variant, s Thus I must agree, on the force of my data which seem to be rather convincing, with M. Shanmugam (op. cir.) that in the present-day Jaffna speech BOTH VOICED and VOICELESS STOPS OCCUR INTERVOCALICALLY, 7 Mr. Sithamparanathan. The same [z] occurred in the speech of another informant for "mixed" common Ceylonese. s Cf. the short discussion in w1.4., pp. 30-31, in my "Notes on Two Dialects".

118

KAMILZVELEBIL

and not with K. Kanapathi Pillai (op. cir., 222-3) who states the intervocalic voiceless stops to be the usual pronunciation in Jaffna Tamil. a 1.12.2. Aspiration of initial /k, t, p/. Apart from the occurrence of voiceless allophones ofintervocalic stops like Ix, .t, t], the strong aspiration of initial stops is a feature which is typical and characteristic of Jaffna (and Ceylonese) Tamil. Cf. [khArmpp~nAn, khh.dampA~fi, t~Ami.lAri, thApptu, tnAmbi:, thAlevi~Ji, phfi:rkkir&y, plaI.18] for LT karuppa_nan,

kat.umpaceu, tami_lan_, tappu, tampf, talaiviti, pdrkki_rdy, pi_lai.

1.12.3. Variants of /c/. In the Jaffna dialect, the affricate plosive pronunciation of initial r seems to be preferred by all informants, cf. [6uTAm, t~Ariy/t:nz, t~fi.dtnhT/t:.dm, ~f~llfi, ~/t:ppirrA6m] for cukam, eariy~a, cut.ukdt.u, collu, cdppit.uki_ratu. However, all informants have the other two allophones o f / c / , viz [~] and [s], in free variation, of. [~ivnpp/t:y, ~fid.mTh~:d.m] for civappdy, eut.ukdt.u, and [seyyA, say6i] for

eeyya, ceyti.
A very interesting, quite frequent and therefore important, variant of initial c- is, however, the frontal stop [ts] which was familiar to all three informants and used by them in utterances like the following: [YendA pe:r tsundAram] "my name is Sundaram", [AVAnts~yyAvlll~] "he has not done", [ieppud.i tsi:tfi:] "how (did) Sita", [tsAnOsykklT1] "to the market". This is probably the feature described by K. Kanapathi, op. cit., p. 223. 1.12.4. All my informants for Jaffna had a nearly hundred per cent merger of the phoneme _/with ./. The normal and most frequent pronunciation of (graphic) [ may be illustrated by the following examples: [thAmi.l, m/t:mbA.1Am, me:s~ym kfi.le:, e.lfimbfive:n, ku!An~, ma.lA, Ippo.lfi~tm, o.leykkI.ar~:n] for LT tami_l, mdmpal_am, m~caiyi_n M_I~, e_lumpuv~, ku_lantai, ma_lai, ippo.lutu, ul_aikki_n_rdn. In a small minority of cases, one of the informants used [.r], cf. [mA.rA, mA.re, kh:y6Am e.r~6A] for ma!ai, kdkitam e!uta. 1.12.5. An interesting case was the realization o f / r / i n the adj. num. oru "one" as [d ~] and [d], cf. [n&n od ~e in~tlyen, ao|odm t Am~.l menial] "I am an Indian, she is a Tamil woman". 1.12.6. Some consonants, p a r t i c u l a r l y / k / a n d / v / are weakened and lost in the intervocalic position quite frequently, cf. utterances like [SAO:rIyIn] LT cakOtariyin, [m/t:n] LT maka_n, [mA~e.1] LT maka[? ~ For a However, when speaking about "intervocalic voicelessplosives", we should rather use - as already stressed - the term voicelessfricatives in the absolute majority of cases - at least in case of/k/. 10 The same informant who had [mA~e.1]for "daughter", used [mAXAn]for "son".

SOMEFEATURESOF CEYLONTAMIL

119

the loss o f / v / , cf. the very frequent forms [~t:n] for ava_n, [/l:.lo] aval.ai, [h:r d.ellIyil] avar t.elliyil, [enAkkAon] e_nakku ava_n, [an t0..I~vAo~IAvu.dAn] avan ullY vantavuta_n. This loss of intervocalic consonant may be also observed with other consonants, though not at all as frequently as with /k/ and /v/, cf. [ve:le!.yIr~:r] vOlai ceykirdr. The tendency was found in the idiolects of all my informants, it was nonetheless strongest with No. 1. 1.12.7. Consonant clusters. 1.12.7.1. The clusters /ilk/ and /tic/ were ALWAYSpronounced as a sequence of homorganic nasal -k vOICEO allophone of the plosive, i.e. log, rid5] with one single exception: once, No. 2 uttered [Ye:6o:13g:rjk~] for ~t6 vd~ki. 1.12.7.2. The phonation of the sequence /nt/ however showed most interesting free variation. While all informants used quite often the sequence with voiced stop, the cluster with voiceless stop, viz. [0t] was nearly equally frequent. Thus, side by side with [S~igclnm, sun~IArnm, vnr~gltu] for contain, cuntaram, vantu, all informants used forms like [vnngurfivA, vhntfi, yeljge:yirntuvA0~trtu~ktu] for LT (?) vantiruppd[, vantu, ehk~yiruntuvantirukki_ratu. Under the impact of a preceding/i/, /nt/ was palatalized: [Anfid3o:m] a_rint6m. 1.12.7.3. The clusters _np and mp were always pronounced with a VOICED stop: my material shows only [anbtu] ,,~ [renbtu] and [ambtu] or [rembtu] for an_pu, ampu. 1.12.7.4. Very important is the phonetic realization of the (graphic) sequence _n_r. This is pronounced in three ways: by far the most frequent realization of this group is the alveolar voiced cluster [nd], which is of course in sharp contrast to the continental (late Middle Tamil) [nn] and (modern colloquial) [.no]. I have e.g. the following items in my data: [n&.lhnd~yk] for LT ndl.a_n.raikku, [md~Ykk~nnA] for i_n_raikke_nna, [ve:rtuondfimeyflle] for v~'u o_n_rum~yillai, [pA.di:rendtu] for pat.?ren_ru, [f~ndtu] for o_n_ru. Only in one item, the stop was frequently clearly voiceless, viz. in LT enru "having said so-and-so": [vh:rAnentm] for LT varuki_r~ne_n_ru. Only once I have in my data the continental Inn]: [App0.dlyi:nnm] for appat, iye_nru. 1.12.7.5. The long (graphic) _rr was always realized as [Lt], of. [n~:Lttu] The transition from one vowel to another is, in Ce Ta, always a smooth hiatus without any glottalization as is often the case in continental dialects. Glottal catch to stop is quite alien to all Ce Ta dialects.

120

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

"yesterday". In [pf~:~o] for pSyirru, it is palatalized under the impact o f the preceding/i/.

1.2. M o r p h o l o g y 1.2.1. N o u n s . The most typical and the most i m p o r t a n t feature o f nominal morphology o f Jaffna T a m i l is the genitive-possessive suffix -nt.e ,,, -nt.a / -nte ,~ nta, ix el. forms like ma:rna:nt.e " o f the uncle", jo:nsint.a [d5o:nsind.A] " o f Mr. Jones", a m m a : n l e " m o t h e r ' s " , a k k a : n t e "elder sister's", appunta "father's". 1.2.2. Pronouns. 1.2.21. 3.p.sg.m.is often realized as a:n ,~ an, L T ava_n, owing loss of intervocalic/v/. 3.p.sg.f. is often a:l., 3.p.honor. a:r. 3.p.pl.uyart. is aviyal., side by side with avarkal. [ avatikal.. 3.p.pl.ahr. ituka. 1.2.22. Very interesting is the accus, of 2.p.sg.: unte / unta, utterance like [undh mani~tukko.l.ltuvan] " I shall excuse you". 1.2.23. The sociative is formed with -o:t.a/-o:t.ay. 1.2.24. The genitive-possessive has the suffix -t.a / -ta ~ -re, forms a:rt.a "whose" (LT ydrut.aiya), etikat, a "our", a:nt. a "his", "his" (honor.), avut.a "their", enta "mine", unta "your" (sg.), ente Equally often, however, one m a y hear the forms with -ut.eya, cf.
feya, u m m u ! e y a , a:ruteya, ehkal.ut.eya, ennut.eya.

to the

cf. an

cf. the
avarta

"my".
avanu-

1.2.3. Verbs. 1.2.31. M y data show the following finite verb suffixes used in FREE VARIATION by a// informants for Jaffna: TM 11 Historically, this suffix seems to have evolved out of OTa gen. poss. -ut.ai (el. avarut.ai nat.t.u "in his land", Kuruntokai 11.8): -_n q- -utai >*-_n q- -u.te >-nt.e > -rite; this is analogical to the Malayalam development of iva_nut.aiya > * ivan_ute > * ivant.e > * ivan_.re > ivan.re (i.e. [iv^nde]). The process and the resulting form are both common to Jaffna Ta. and Malayalam. x2 Some of the informants preferred the first set (the first column) of suffixes, which I think is historically prior, to the second, which seems to be an innovation in Jaffna Tamil. However, neither of them used this or that system to the exclusion of the other. Thus the Jaffna dialect is of much interest also for general linguistics as an illustration of a system which is, in our days, rather unsteady and in rapid development.

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL

121

1.p. 2.p. 3.p.m. f. n. honor.

Sg. -an / -ay / -an / -a / -u / -ar /

-en ~ -e:n -a:y / -e: -a:n -a:l. N -a: -utu -a:r

P1. -am ,~ a:m /-ore -iyal. / -i:tikal. epicene -inam / -a:rkal. ~ -a:tika(l.) n. -uka

Illustrations: 1.p.sg. ceyt_an "I did, I made", kol.l.uvan "I shall take", po:ran" I go", va:ran "I come", irukkiran "I am", po:yit.t.an "I went away, I left", na:n e~tiruvan "I shall be rising";13 po:ren "I go", po:kre:n "I go". 2.p.sg. irukkiray "you are"; pa:rkkira:y "you see"; ca:ppit.ure: "you eat", irukkire: "you are". 3.p.sg.m. va~tiruvan "he will be coming", ca:ppirran "he eats", ca'.ppit.uvan "he will eat", ca:ppit.t.vit.t.a:n "he finished eating". 3.p.sg.f. va~turuva "she will be coming", taruva:l. "she will give", a:tina:l. "she danced", ceykira: "she does". 3.p.sg.n. irukku "it is", nat.akkutu "it walks", po:utu "it goes". 3.p. honor, va~tiruvar "he [hon.] will be coming", irukkira:r "he [hon.] is". 1.p.pl. po:ram, po:ra:m, po:rom "we go". 2.p.pl. po:riyal. " y o u go", ca:ppit.uviyal. " y o u will eat", pa:rkkiriyal. "you see", vat31iyal. "you came", po:ni:hkal. "you went". 3.p.pl. epic. aviyal, po:yinam "they went", kut.ikkinam "they drink"; ceykira:rkal. "they do", a!iccuppo:t.t.a:hka, "they did beat". 3.p.pl.n. po:yit.t.uka "they left". 1.2.32. A few times I was happy to have tape-recorded the rare forms, historically most probably prior to those described above, forms which may indicate how Tamil finite verbal flexion as such originated and developed. Cf. va_nt_ani in [t hAmbi:ni: yeppoTo.l~mbIl~:yrodtu v~n~t^nI] 1~ This and similar forms are somewhat difficult for segmentation and analysis. They are met with in all Ceylon dialects of Ta., el. an utterance from my Batticaloa material: na:n enatu ve:leye ompat_u manikki tot.at~kiruvan "I shall begin my work at nine o'clock". As far as I see, these forms may be explained in three ways: first, as adverb, participles q- finite future of v.b. iru "to be" (LT tot.atikiyirupp~), where the future tense surf. is weakened, spirantized and voiced; or, as an antique preservation of a participial noun in the finite verb function, filling the Predicate slot in the clauses: na:n.., tot.ahkiruvan = LT nan to.tat~kuki.rava_n; third, there is a remote possibility of explaining these forms as a contamination of present tot.a~kuki.r~ + future tot.a~kuv~. Though the second explanation sounds tempting, the first seems to be more plausible; the third is improbable.

122

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

"brother, when did you come from Colombo?", further ca~liccinan [6^n~lI~inAn] "I met", for LT cantittO, and ceytaniya: in [ni: India ve:le ~eydAniy/t:] "have you done this work?" One should notice the main stress on the root in [wi~lAnI] "you [sg] came". It seems that forms like irukkiran "I am" developed from <*irukkiranan, i.e. *irukki.ra n ~ ; likewise va:ran "I am coming" <*va'ranan <*va:rana:n, i.e. *varuki.ran~. The attested forms like va~tani, cey!aniya:, ca~ticcinan are most probably to be analyzed as *vanta nf, *ceyta nf -t- -d, *cantitta n ~ , i.e. they are a sequence of rel. participles in the determinative slots, and the personal pronouns as fillers o f the head-slots. The 2.p.pl.suff. -iyal. seems to be the result of spirantization and weakening, and finally loss of the group -rk-: *-ir-kal. > *-i(r)ka[ > *,ikal. > *ival. > -iya[ (or perhaps without the stage *-iva[). 1~ What is the origin of 3.p.pl.uyart. -inam I am unable to say at present. 1.2.33. In note 14, an analogy between Jaffna and Brahmin Ta. was indicated (identical tendency in the development of the 2.p.pl.suffix). Another interesting point in this connection is the identity of Jaffna and Brahmin Ta. 2.p.pl.imper.suff. -hko:, cf. Jaffna forms va:ruhko:, iruhko: "come you [pl.]", "sit you [pl.]", and prohibitives po:ka:te:i~ko: "do not go", ca:ppit.a:te:liko: "do not eat". 1.2.34. Neg. conditional has the suffix -a:t.!i, el. [ni: v~e:r/t:t.t.i] for LT ni vardvi!tdl "if you do not come". 1.2.4. "As soon as" (LT: rel.part. +-ut.an_) is -o:t.an in Jaffna Tamil (-a of rel.part. + u - > o:), cf. el.umpino:t.an "as soon as one rises". 1.3. One peculiarity should be mentioned in connection with syntax: for a dative of direction, the Jaffna speakers used a noun in the locative, e.g. i~!iya:vil ni:hkal, eppo: po:riya[ "when will you go to India?". 1.4. The typical hiatus-filter in Jaffna Ta. is -y-, used also in the position where Standard Literary Tamil would use -v-, cf. Jaffna put.ikkayille, ka:n. ayille for LT pit.ikkavillai, kdn.avillai.

1.5. Vocabulary I give below a list of lexical items which are typical for the speech of my Jaffna informants; either they do not occur in other modern
1~ Cf. the Bratmain surf. -e:[ which seems to be a further development in this direc s tion: po:riya[ > po :re:[.

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL

123

c o l l o q u i a t s , o r t h e r e is a m o r e o r less s t r i k i n g s e m a n t i c difference in t h e i r use b e t w e e n J a f f n a a n d t h e c o n t i n e n t a l dialects, o r t h e y h a v e a specific p h o n e m i c shape, different f r o m t h a t o f t h e c o n t i n e n t a l f o r m s .

allan, atta:r " b r o t h e r - i n - l a w " appu x5 " f a t h e r , p a p a " appot.i " t h u s , in t h a t w a y " amman "uncle" aytu " t h i n ''.6 ayya: " f a t h e r " a'r " w h o " i~ca " h e r e " iru " t o sit ''17 ut.aniya: " a t o n c e " un.t.u " i t is, it exists ''*s u[l.e:kku " i n s i d e - t o " e:la:tu "it is n o t p o s s i b l e " kateykka "to speak" ka:lamureyile " i n t h e m o r n i n g " ka:vi!iyavit.ena: " i n t h e m o r n i n g " ka:su ~9 " m o n e y " ki[ame " w e e k ''s~

kut.ikka " t o b a t h e " ket.iya: " q u i c k l y ''z* korn. amen. t.u " g o v e r n m e n t ''22 ko:5?i " t r a i n " ko :ppi " c o f f e e " kra:mam " v i l l a g e " gra:mam " v i l l a g e " cat. t.ey " b l o u s e " ca:ri " s a r e e ''23 !apa:lkanto:r ~ t apa:lka.nt.o:r " p o s t oflCice',24

tamil.ar " a T a m i l i a n " !ami[pompil.[e " T . w o m a n " tamilmanu~i " T . w o m a n " !aruka " g i v e " (wife t o h u s b a n d ) tavun " t o w n " tuvahka " t o b e g i n " !o:se [~o:se] ~5 " d o s a i "

*~ In LT appa_n, app(t; appu and appucci "papa" is used in South Eastern continental dialects, too. a6 E.g. "thin rice-field", cf. LT aitu "beautiful, soft", Put. 29.2, 271.3 etc. ,7 In LT and most cont. dialects, iru is used today only as verbum existentiae or in the meaning of "live, wait, stay". My informants used this root only in the meaning "to sit", e.g. va:nko: irunko: "do come in and take a seat"; anakku munna: murukan irukkira:r "in front of me sits Mr. Murugan". In OTa iru was used in the meaning "to sit", cf. Pur. 66 vat.akkirunt6r( "he who was sitting (facing) the north". 18 In Jaffna Ta. two roots are used as verba exististentiae: a-ku and u[-, u~.~t.u; in spoken cont. Ta. uht.u is now used only very rarely as the verb of existence. ,9 In cont. TamiI panam is used rather than kacu. 20 In cont. Ta. varam is used rather than ki.lamai for "week"; the lexeme ki_lamai survived in the names of the week. 2, A typically Jaffna utterance with this item is na:n ketiya: va:ran "I am coming quickly". 2~ In continental spoken Tamil this is either sarkka:ru or araca:ftkon. 28 Jn continental spoken Ta. it is put.ave or ci:le / ce:le. 24 tapa:lkanto:r seems to be a "partial Lehnfibersetzung of Dutch postkantoor (Dutch kantoor < French comptoir) and is as such a trace of the Dutch cultural influence in Ceylon during the 18th century" (gratefully acknowledged as a personal communication from F. B. J. Kuiper). In continental Ta. only tapa:la:pi:s or tapa:la:fi:su is used. This word is considered uncivilized and alien by Ceylon speakers. 25 In cont. Ta.~ usually [do:se].

124
morrow

KAMIL ZVELEBIL to-

na:l.anteykku "the day after

TM

nittirey "sleep" nittireya:kka "to put to sleep" pat.am "cinema" piliyar "husband" pil.atle "much; aloud''~ puru.san "husband" pulle "daughter" pe~ca:ti "wife" pevtu "wife" pe:~fu "then" policci "daughter" pot. iyen "boy"

bl.auz "blouse" makan "son" makal. "daughter" maccan "brother-in-law" maccal. "sister-in-law" mael. "daughter" maneyvi "wife''2s ma:n "son" ma:ma: "uncle" mu~Ii "before" raukke "blouse" val.ikka "to go" si:mey "England" si:le "saree"

2. T R I N C O M A L E E

2. For the Ceylon Tamil subdialect of TRINCOMALEEof. the main results as described in my "Notes on Two Dialects of Ceylon Tamil", especially on pp. 34-5. Here I give only a few truly diagnostic features, which are perhaps characteristic only for the Trincomalee subdialect. 2.11. The (graphic) -ai was realized with nearly absolute consistency as [a] in the Trincomalee speech: ve:la, ettana, kan.n.a, enna for LT v~lai,

etta_nai, ka.nn,ai, e_nn_ai.

2.12. The cluster -_n.r- was realized more or less always as alveolar voiced [nd]: entu, inteykku for e_n.ru, in_.raikku. 2.21 2.p.sg.sufflX is always -a: in the Trincomalee speech: ke:tkira: "you [sg.] ask", al.ukira "you [sg.] weep", mul.ikkira "you [sg.] stare". In interrogation before -a: it is -i, as in nitlirakol.riya: "do you [sg.] sleep?" 2.22. A specific 3.p.f.sg. su/Ex occurs in this subdialect, viz. -ava, e.g. anuppinava "she sent", iru~tava "she was". 2.3. It seems that this subdialect has preserved more consistently than
38 Cf. cont. CT na:lanikki. ~7 E.g. pilaf.re ciritta:n "he laughed aloud"; but also pilatte mala "heavy rain". 28 In cont. spoken Tamil this old literary word comes only now to be used instead

or the more colloquial and frequentpeeca:Ii, po.nea:!i.

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL

125

the other dialects in living use the 2.p.pl.pron. n?r (and the analogic verb-formation) in the honorific function: ni:r patil collave:n, um " y o u (honor.) must answer"; enappa: colluri:r "what do you (polite) say?.".

3. BATTICALOA

Motto: "I am a native of Batticaloa

which lies in the eastern part of Ceylon. The spoken language of that country is different from the spoken language of Jaffna." (Svami Vipulananda). 3.0. I n Tamil, Batticaloa is called malt.akka[appu. It is the centre of Ceylonese Tamilians living in the South East o f the island, and the dialect spoken in Batticaloa has obviously two slightly different subdialects: one spoken by the c6_nakar, the Tamil-speaking Muslim comm u n i t y living there, ~a and the other spoken by the Tamil Hindus o f Batticaloa. The Batticaloa f o r m o f speech is THE MOST LITERARY-LIKE OF ALL SPOKEN DIALECTS OF TAMIL. ~t is the MOST MARGINAL dialect o f the language, and as such, it has preserved, on the one hand, several very antique features, and it has remained m o r e true to the literary n o r m than any other f o r m o f Tamil; but, on the other hand, it has developed a few striking innovations. 3~ Batticaloa Tamil has mainly some very specific features o f vocabulary. However, it must be classified with the other Ceylonese dialects, since it is related to them by some characteristic traits o f its p h o n o l o g y (e.g. the complete merger o f I and 1.), o f its m o r p h o l o g y (of. the genitive avarta "his") as well as o f its lexicon (e.g. such items as ket.iya:, ka:su). 29 Batticaloa COn_akarhave a very rich heritage of folk-songs. Some of them have been collected and published, e.g. by S. Vithyananthan in Mat..takka[appu nat.t.uppatalka[ (Kandy, 1960), by Sadasiva Aiyar in Vasantan_kavittirat.t.u, or by K. P. Ratnam, Kaakaiyil i_npattami.l, pp. 82-87. According to the 1956 census there live about 468 thousand of Tamil speaking c6_nakar in Ceylon. 30 The informant, Mr. Manikkam, 23, was a Hindu vel[a.la, born in Kannankuda, Batticaloa district. He was an ideal informant, natural, easy to deal with, obliging and intelligent. He was certainly speaking his own colloquial form of Tamil. However, his speech was in most features so near to the literary standard that even his friends from Jaffna and Colombo were delighted and amused, but they confirmed the fact that he was actually speaking what Is spoken as DAY-TO-DAY SPEECHby the Hindus of Batticaloa.

126

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

3.1. Phonology

3.11. Vowels
3.11.1. As in Jaffna Ta., /a/ initially and in first syllables is mostly realized as [/t] to [a], i.e., more fronted and lower than the continental [A], cf. [/tpp/t:, hn.n.h:, a.dfit!A, avAr]. Rarely, [A] occurs in the same position, cf. [pAl]i]. No [~e] variant occurred in the speech of my informant. 3.11.2. Initially,/e/was usually preceded by slight prepalatalization. Thus I find in my data [iennu.deYpe:r] "my name", [Yend.A pAl.l.i] "my school", [YeVVA.1AV~t]"how much". 3.11.3. /o/ and /o:/ in first syllables were often realized as [~] and [~:], cf. [~gllul3ga] for LT eolluhkal., [pg:~t.h:r] for LT pdyvit.tdr. 3.11.4. Final -~ occurred quite frequently as/-a/, though the change was by no means regular, cf. [ne:rALtI1A, Ye13gA, avAng:l.A] for n~rattil~,

e/lk(, ava_ndl&
3.11.5. The (graphic) sequence -ai was realized differently. Medially, it was often preserved as a sequence [ey], or monophthongized into [a], of. [m/t6fireykki, t aleykki, sameykkir/t:] for maturaikku, talaikku, eamaikkiral.; but [o13gA.1Att/t:n, manAvi, aVAnAppO:lA, tA1Apph:] for uhkal.aittdn, manaivi, ava_naippOla, talaippdy. In final position, it was sometimes preserved, more frequently changed into/-a/ or/-e/, cf. [me:sey, ve:ley] but [ka.dA, avAle, se:le, kil.Ame, to:se] for kat.ai, aval.ai, eflai,

ki_lamai, t6eai.
3.11.6. Final nasal consonants are never lost and the preceding vowel never nasalized in Batticaloa speech, of. [avAn, n/t:n, s&ppi.duv&n, mAXAn, sun~tArAm, mArAm, nxrAm, p/t:lum]. 3.11.7. There is a general tendency to a frontal and higher articulation of all vowels, compared to the pronunciation of other Ceylonese and non-Ceylonese speakers. 3.12. Consonants 3.12.1. Intervocalic Stops. The most striking feature of my Batticaloa informant's speech in this respect was his pronunciation of intervocalic / k / a s a VOICELESSFRICATIVE. Out of 24 items in a list containing intervocalic -k- he pronounced in 23 cases the voiceless fricative [x], as in [SUXAm, /txam, t axA.dm:, pAXA1, mAxu.dAm, mAXAI, muxAm, pax~y], and only once he used the voiced fricative in [mATi.r~Si:]. In the same item he used once the voiced stop [mAgi.l~Si]. Once, in connected speech, he used the form [mah^n], and several times he used the variant [~/] in

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL u t t e r a n c e s like [ve:leTI.dey~A6m] for L T po:yIre:n].

127

v~lai kit.aittatu, o r [na:n

3.12.2. As regards the o t h e r intervocalic plosives (.t, t, p ) his p r o n u n ciation, however, was IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE CONTINENTAL NORM. I a m therefore inclined to accept F. B. J. K u i p e r ' s view that "the m o d e r n p r o n u n c i a t i o n as It], [p] w o u l d r a t h e r have to be e x p l a i n e d as the result o f a s e c o n d a r y d e v e l o p m e n t to voiceless plosives", which r e a c h e d (some sub-dialect or dialects of) Jaffna to some extent, a n d p e r h a p s s o m e o t h e r Ceylonese dialects to a lesser extent, b u t n o t Battical o a (the m o s t m a r g i n a l Ta. dialect), a n d which did n o t a f f e c t / k / , since / k / , as we have seen, is p r o n o u n c e d r a t h e r as a voiceless fricative whenever there is a n y "unvoicing", a n d o n l y very rarely as a " p u r e " voiceless s t o p in a n y Ceylonese Ta. d i a l e c t ? 1 3.12.3. The t r a n s i t i o n o f / k / to /v/ is frequent in B a t t i c a l o a T a m i l in one item, cukam, cf. [SUVAm/t:], [na:n SUVAm]. 3.12.4. S t r o n g initial a s p i r a t i o n o f k, t, p is c o m m o n in B a t t i c a l o a a n d other Ceylonese Dialects, cf. [thAmI.1AryA|, thAmbiyu.de, tho:se, thAunIle, khA.dfimphA~, ph/t:rkklr/ty] for L T tarni,larkal., tampiyut.aiya,

tOcai, taunilO, kat.umpaccai, pdrkkirdy.

3.12.5. T h o u g h /c/ was p h o n e t i c a l l y realized in different w a y s , the v a r i a n t which was m o s t frequently preferred was an alveolar spirant Is]: [SI1A, seyyA, sIrlkkA]. 3.12.6. A n e a r l y c o m p l e t e m e r g e r o f / l / w i t h / 1 / i s t y p i c a l for Battic a l o a in a c c o r d a n c e with the o t h e r C e y l o n Ta. dialects, cf. [mA|A] for malai, [killttmpo:yi.t.tu] for kilittupOyvit.t.u etc. I n [mAT~.r~i:], [.r] occ u r r e d (once in the whole corpus). ~1 "Note on Old Tamil and Jaffna Tamil', p. 59. The more or less consequent distribution of the allophones of [k[,/t/, ]p/ according to a certain pattern (cf. w 1.12.1) in Jaffna Ta. rather indicates that there the innovation is rooted more or less firmly, whereas in the most marginal Batticaloa dialect we still have a situation more in agreement with the OTa state of affairs, with the exception of Ix] which, on the contrary, indicates vigorous invasion of the unvoicing tendency: however, the result is a fricative, not a stop. The matter still remains obscure, and the great number of free variants is rather baffling, hut so it is. Anyhow, it is useful to quote in this connection Kuiper's words (op. cit., 59) about the voiced pronunciation of intervocalic plosives which "is apparently a mere corollary of the lax articulation. Another corollary of this articulation is the fricative pronunciation which must be dated back to the Sangam period (i.e., the first centuries A.D.)". I think we may fully agree with Kuiper's conclusion that "in the present state of our knowledge the current view that the voiceless plosives of (one of) the Jaffna dialects represent an antique feature of the pre-Sangam period (for this is implied in the theory if our conclusions are correct) would seem to lack a solid foundation".

128

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

3.12.7. Final liquids are mostly preserved in Batt. speech, cf.[v^rh:vit..t~t:l, ni:ogo], ivo.liy/t:r]. 3.12.8. The cluster -r_r- was consistently realized as [.ttd, of. [ne:ttm] "yesterday". 3.12.9. Typical for Batticaloa in contrast to other Ceylon Ta. dialects is the realization of the cluster -_n_r-as [nd.], e.g. in [In.dey] "today" for LT i_n_rai(kku). In en_ru "having said so-and-so", however, n_r occurs as [nd], cf. [v^rmxlrAnendm] for LT varuki_r~_nel3.ru. 3.2.10. It has been stressed that the Batticaloa spoken dialect is the most "literary" one of all colloquial forms of Tamil. I give here, as instances to support this statement, a few utterances of nay informant out of the hundred and odd utterances which are at my disposal. 1. [IvA yenn~.deya mAneyvi] for LT iva! ennulaiya man_aivi. 2. [ni:0gA.1yh:r] for LT nf~ka[ ydr. 3. [I6m yh:rO.deyA ve:ley] for LT itu ydrut.aiya v~lai. 4. [Yennfi.deyApe:r sun~iArom] for LT e_nn_ut.aiyap~r cuntaram. 5. [hi: kh:sAnupplnh:lfim avAn i0gm vArAm~t:.t.t~t:n] for LT ni kdcu an_uppin_Mum avan_ ihk~ varamdt.t.d~3. 6. [n~:n ke.dIyh: vArml'IrAnsndm sf~llm] for LT ndn dkkiramdy varukir~e_nru col 7. [A0ClA ge:le mAfidSA1 mrAm] for LT anta dlai ma~ca[ niram. 8. [In.dey s~t:ppi.dtuvA6m yennA yIn~kkirA6m] for LT in_raikku cdppiluvatu e_nn_airukki_ratu. 9. [avArTo] ko:ppi yu.dIkklra:rl, o.1] for LT avarka[ kdppi kut.ikki.rarkal.. 10. [o0gA ku.dumbAleppA.dI vi:.t.tlls] forlLT uhkal, kut.umpam vft.t.il~eppati. As may be seen, the differences between Standard Literary Tamil and the Batticaloa day-to-day speech are mostly only very slight with regard to the phonological system and the phonetic realization of the system. 3.2. Morphology It is natural that what has just been stated about Batticaloa Tamil phonology, is also valid as to the morphological system of this dialect. Batticaloa Tamil morphology shows only a few divergent forms when compared with the morphemes of Standard Literary Tamil. 3.2.1. Nouns and pronouns. Only the ablative and genitive suffixes show marked divergence from the standard morphemes. The pl.suff. -kal. was always carefully pronounced by my informant even in such items as [VAyA1yA.1]"fields".

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL

129

The accus, suffix was frequently realized as [a], cf. ohka[a for LT uhka[ai, in agreement with the phonation of ai. The locative surf. -ile, as in taunile "in the town", vi:t.t.ile "in the house", agrees with the CT suffax. Peculiar is the ablative suffix -it.teruutu , as in avanit.t.eruutu "from him"; one may perhaps compare with this ablative the LT ava_n-it.attil-iruntu. The genitive-possessive is rather rich in interesting suffixes. First, there is the suffix -in, identical with the standard -/_n: akka:yin raukkey "the blouse of elder sister". This suffi is, however, rare. Second, the most typical suffix is -t.a / -at.a, cf. ent.a "mine", avarta ve:le "his work", e~kat.a "ours", ma:miyat.a pu[l.e "the daughter of the mother-in-law'. Most probably the same suffix, only in less contracted forms, is the -ut.eya /-ut.ey /-ut.e, as in ya:rut, eya, ma:ma:vu.teya, ennut, ey pe:r, tampiyut.e appa:. Finally, the form entey "mine", seems, too, to be based on a development of-ut.eya. Interesting (and to be compared with the Brahmin Tamil form) is the reduced shape of ava:[ for LT avarkal. "they". 3.2.2. Verbs. 3.2.21. My data show the following finite verb suffixes which are all in free variation in the speech of my informant: 1.p. 2.p. 3.p.m. f. ahr. 3.p.honor.

Sg. -an / -e:n -ay(i) / -a:y -a:n -a:[ ~ -a: -u / -a!u -ar/ -a:r

Pl. -o:m

-a:rka[ / -a:~ka

Instances: varukiran "I come", po:kire:n "I go", po:kinrayi "you [sg.] go", pa:rkkira:y "you [sg.] see", ea:ppit.uva:n "he eats", a:lina: "she danced", irukku "it is", nat.akkira!u "it walks", pa:rkkirar "he [honor.] sees", po:kura:r "he [honor.] goes", po:kuro:m "we go", pareyra:rkal. "they speak", eollama:t.t.a:ftka "they won't say". 3.2.22. Among the tense suffixes, one should notice the pres. tense suffix -kinr- [ymr] in the form po:kinrayi "you [sg.] go". It occurred in the utterance [ni: yennA seyyA p6:xlnrAyi] "what are you [sg.] going to do", and the answer was [nh:n ku.likkA po:xIr~:n] "I am going to bathe". 3.2.23. For the forms ending in -iruvan, of. note 13. In my Batticaloa data I have the following illustration: [na:n yen~6tu ve:lsy8 OmbA6m man.ikkI to.dA13gIruvAn ].

130

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

3.3. As far as the syntactic sandhi is concerned, we should be aware o f the difference between Battiealoa ka:n. alla a n d Jaffna ka:.nayilley, cf. with L T kdn. avillai, the c o n t i n e n t a l colloquial T a m i l form ka:.nalle. 3.4. The m a i n divergences between the Ceylon Batticaloa dialect a n d the literary s t a n d a r d are thus limited to the sphere of vocabulary. I n this sphere, however, the differences are considerable. I give here a list of lexical items gathered exclusively from m y corpus.

atar " p a t h ''3~ atta:n "brother-in-law" appa: "father ''an ampuyam "lotos" urakka " a l o u d " uvat.t.u "increase" (trans.) e:marn "midnight, night" on.n.a:tu "is n o t possible" kat.umeya:ka "strongly, heavily" k a t e y k k a "to speak" ka:, excl. particle 34 ka:cu " m o n e y " kiruka "to t u r n "

kil.ame "week" kuZcuva:yan "small box" ku:reykko:tu "house" ket.iya: "quickly, suddenly" ko:ppi "coffee" ce:le "saree" t.reyn "train" tampiyut.e appa: " h u s b a n d ''35 nahkan, am "the m e e n a h " (a bird) ni!tirey "sleep" ne!umu[avan "rope" pareyya "to speak ''36 pul. l.e "daughter"

32 cf. Pu.ram, 138.1,204.9, 150.10. 33 Cf. Jaffna ayya:; my informant emphatically stated that in his village they would not use (collama:t.t.a:hka) the word ayya:. 84 Cf. ennaka: colray "what do you say", e:~ka: cenneykki po:ra:r "why does he [honor.] go to Madras"; further in a folk-song: unakke: uriyatuka: "it is proper for you". Some authors quote this excl. particle in connection with el- forming an item elakka "all" (cf. Andronov, op. cit., p. 37). From another folk-song I have noted down manam urukavillaiyo: ka: "does not the heart melt", and from some other source I find in my data elakka: i~ke: ca~t~t vantit.tuppo: "all of you come a little here (and) go". This particle/ca is quoted by a source as ancient as the Tolkappiyam in Col. s. 274, among the acaiccol (poetic expletives), and II.ampfira.nar, the commentator, says ka: utuka e_navarum. It is interesting that he uses here the "middle" deictic utu! ka is also quoted by Pavan_antiin his Nan__n~L 3~ My informant was very emphatic on this point; according to him, a woman of his village would never say puru.sar for "husband"; only vi:t.t.ukka:rar "householder", or tampiyut.e appa: "the father of the young(er) boy", would be used. 36 This item was used constantly by my informant, who never used the standard pgca "to speak". Cf. utterances like [ava:.l YannApAr~yra:rTo.l]"what do they say", [.t~mi1. p^reyrIya:] "do you (sg.) speak Tamil?" This is indeed a thrilling word: it once again indicates some sort of special connection between Ceylon and Kerala. Cf. with Battic. pareyya "to speak" the current Malayalam parayuka "to say, speak, tell", connected with Ka. parisu "to speak, chat", Kod. pare- "to utter", Tu. parefictmi "to prate, prattle", Ga. (S.) park- "to say, speak". All these forms may be connected with OTa pa_rai "to speak, say", n. "word, saying, statement", which occurs in Middle Tamil too, but has ceased to be used in modern literary Tamil.

SOME FEATURESOF CEYLON TAMIL

131

pen. "daughter" peruva:yan "big bracelet" pe:la [pS:la] "like" poruppu "hardship, suffering" makan "son" maneyvi "wife" maruka: "another time, again" mut.uka "to approach" munukku "in front of" mulleykka:ran "headman of cultivators"

mecca:n "brother-in-law" mecci "sister-in-law" va:ppa: "father" (originally used only by Muslims) va:rikka:lan "ox" viracu "to approach, be close" vi:t.tukka: rar "husband" ve[[am "water ''sT ve[l.o:t.an "unripe coconut ''3s

4. MIXED CEYLONESE TAMIL 4.0. The features described in the following paragraphs were found in the corpus of data gathered from informants who spent their life in different places in Ceylon and spoke what might be called a mixed dialect o f c o m m o n Ceylonese Tamil. Thus, e . g . T . Gunaraja, aged 21, ve[l.dl.a by caste, was born in Malaya from Jaffna parents, spent his time since 1950 partly in Jaffna and partly in Colombo.

4.1. Phonology
4.1.1. Vowels. 4.1.11. Most of the informants have a fronted and low variety o f / a / in stressed syllables. 4.1.12. I n i t i a l / e / a n d / e : / o c c u r r e d only with slight or no prepalatalization, initial /o/ a n d / o : / only with slight or no bilabial onset. 4.1.13. The sequence -ai- (graphic) was frequently preserved as [-ey], cf. [pI.ley] "mistake"; however, it freely varied with the monophthongs /a/or/eft 3~ Again a thrilling item: cL Ma. ve.llam "water". Only in Batticaloa dialect and in Malayalam vel[am means "water" even up to this day. SLT yell.ammeans "flood, deluge, sea; abundance", and only in the earliest strata of the literary language it also signifies simply "water", e.g. in Puram 328.7 Similarly, Tu. bol.lais "flood, inundation", Te. velli "flow, flood, stream", velluva "flood, inundation". Another clear proof of an independent connection between Malayalam and Batticaloa Tarnil. 38 Probably "the one with water".

132

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

4.1.2. Consonants. 4.1.21. Intervocalic stops. No one of the informants kept consistently to any single aUophone of the intervocalic stops/k, t, p/. In the idiolects of all these informants, voiced and voiceless varieties were in free variation; nevertheless, there was a marked preference for this or that variety in the speech of individual informants. 4.1.21.1. /k/: Intervocalically, the variants [x], [hi, IT] and [k h] are discernible in my data. Out of these, Ix], a voiceless dorsal spirant, is by far the most frequent one: [axAm, pAxey, t AxA.dm]. Next in frequency comes [7], a voiced dorsal spirant, as in [aTAm, pATu~li, mAT/t:r/t:d3An]. [hi, a voiced glottal spirant, was as rare as [kh], an aspirated voiceless stop. They occurred each only once: [mah/t:r/t:zAn] and

[su.dtukh~: .din].
4.1.21.2. /t/: Intervocalically, only two variants are found in my data: [~5], a voiced apical spirant, and [~1], front, apical, dental to post-dental, voiced stop, rather lenis, with slower release, unaspirated: for the first variant, cf. [se:y6i, m/t:6iri], for the second [amey~li, mAglurey, thAleyvi~li, m~:~liri]. 4.1.21.3. /p/: Intervocalically, only two variants of this phoneme occur in my corpus: the voiced bilabial spirant [13], as in [pI~IAI3A1Am,ko:13Am], and a voiced bilabial plosive, as in [vIbA~/t:rAm, plrAbAlAm]. All the variants were found in free variation in the speech of the informants, as stated above. Thus e.g. the same speaker, only within short interval, used the following two allophones for the same item: [t Ab/t:lTAl.a.df/:r] and LtAl3/t:lkA.n.d/t:rikkm] for "post-office", "to the post-office". 4.1.22. Aspirated initial stops are regular: [khA.du~t/t:si, thAleyvigli, ph/L:SA] and even [akkh/l:] for kat.utdci, talaiviti, pd.sai, akkd, occur in my material. 4.1.23. A complete merger of ./ with [ is regular: [pi.ley] for pil_ai, [yh:.lp/~:.nAm] for Jaffna. 4.1.24. _np and rnp were always realized with voiced stop: [Anbtu, ambm]. 4.1.25. -_r_r-was pronounced as [t t]: [ne:ttm] or [ne:tttu] for LT n~r_ru. 4.2. Morphology 4.2.1. Nouns. 4.2.11. Apart from the genitive-possessive suffixes described above, the suffix -!ey occurred, which may be connected historically with the OTa -ut.ai, of. ehkat.ey appu "our father".

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLONTAMIL

133

4.2.12. The ablative suffix is a complex of -it.attil + -ay + -iru~tu, of. [~tvAnI.d^ttikyIrfiodtu] " f r o m him". 4.2.1.3. The sequence -ay [-Ay] or -ey [-ey] tended to be suffixed to some other case-terminations, too; of. forms like avana:ley, instr. "by him", avano:t.ay, soc. "with him", ne:rattilay, loc. "in the time". 4.2.2. Verbs. 4.2.21. Several times the probably very antique finite verb-form consisting of the rel. part. -k pers. pronoun was used by this or that informant, as in [ni: Yeppo v^n~len~] LT n~ epp6 vantdy "when did you come?"; ni" i~ce irukkraniya: "are you [sg.] here?"; na:n tihkranan "I eat". 4.2.22. Once the form in -i:r for 2.p.pl. was used, po:kuri:r "you [pl.] go". 4.2.23. varuvinam and anuppinam for SLT varuvdrka[ and a_nuppin_drka[ are forms to be specially noted. 4.3. As far as external sandhi is concerned, one should notice the utterances ke:t.killey, ku:ppi!illey and kutikkilley for SLT kYt.kavillai, kftppit.avillai and ku!ikkavillai. Cf. also in continental colloq. Ta. ke:kkalle, ku:ppitalle and kut.ikkalle.

4.4. Vocabulary

annitam "injustice" appacci "grandpapa" appalikkotta " of that manner, of

that quality"

appa: yi " g r a n d m a m a " appu " p a p a " amma:n "uncle" (LT mdmd) aruvakku "to finish" a:n.am "curry" a:mpa[e "man (male)" a:rina "cold" (adj.)

a:l.ka: t.t.iviral "forefinger" iFwe "here" innam "now" ippo:l. "now ''39 ilavu "death" ucara "above" utiram "blood" uppi!i "in that manner "~~ urakkam "sleep" eppan "a little" eyo: "alas! really?"

~ Cf. Ma. ippal. SLT has ippo!utu, ~pa!tu, ippatu, ipp& 4o Formed with the middle demonstrative u-, current in Old Tamil and in a few contemporary Dr. languages, but not in SLT of today.

134

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

e!eyavar " y o u n g e r b r o t h e r " ~a gavan, ama:y "carefully" e:la "to be possible "~2 hkoppu " y o u r father" caruki " n e a r " otava:tu "is o f n o use" o:m "yes" caruvu "to quarrel, wrangle ''47 cirupe~ "girl ''4s o:ram " p u d . m u l i e b r e " kat.akka " t o go" curukkena "quickly" kan.akka "well; m a n y , m u c h ''4s celia "to g o ''49 kan.~i:r vat.ikka " t o weep" tatimal " c o l d (illness)" kateykka " t o speak, t a l k ''44 la~tey "father" kattaparn " d o n k e y " lappu " m i s t a k e " kanistey viral "little finger" lara " t o give" kareya:n "white a n t " tarun.aka:lam " t i m e o f distress" kavarakoyya:n " a l l i g a t o r " tarcani "forefinger" ka:cu " m o n e y " !al.ir " b u d " ka:lamey "in the m o r n i n g " !a:lam " e a r t h " kil.ame "week" ta:!a " b e l o w "5~ kun. arn " h e a l t h " tinna " t o eat" kuricci " c h a i r ''45 liricci " a g a i n " ketikka " t o praise" tiriya " a g a i n " kel.ikka "to t u r n " !i:ni " f o o d (for p e o p l e ) " ko:kki " c o o k ''46 tukkam "distress" ko:cci " t r a i n " lut.eyppam " b r o o m " ko:tIi "distress" lupparava:y "clean (ly)" ko:ppi "coffee" lupparavu pan.n.u "to d e a n " 41 Cf. the item mu:ttavar "elder brother". In LT the opposition is a.nga_n"elder brother" : tampi "younger brother". 42 E.g. irukke:loma: "is it possible?" ~8 E.g. ka.nakka mara~ka.l"many trees". 44 Cf. kateykkiratukka: vanta:r "he came to talk". 4s Cf. Urdu kursL
4e From Dutch? [This is apparently one of the traces of "colonial" Dutch that occur both in Ceylonese Tamil and in Malay; cf. Malay koki (formerly used by Europeans for the female native cook) from the Dutch diminutive kokkie (in the Straits kuki from Eng. cookie, see Wilkinson, Malay-English Dictionary, pp. 606, 620). A similar ease is Tamil kakkOs, kakkucu "latrine, privy, W.C." : Malay kakus, from Dutch kakhuis (now a vulgar and dialectal word). It would be interesting to know if this word is confined to Ceylon or also used on the Continent. The Tamil Lexicon and Pjatigorskij-Rudin, Tamil'sko-RusskO Slovar' give both forms, the Tranquebar Dictionary3 (1933) only kakkucu (which it incorrectly derives from the Portuguese), while the first edition of Mousset-Dupnis (1855) has the pleonastic expression kakkasvit.u (Dutch huis = vft.u). Kuiper.] 47 Cf. Skt. darv-, ~arvati "to hurt, injure, kill"; Czech ~arvdtka "wrangle, fighting". 4s In cont. Tamil rather c(rumi. ~8 Preferred to the current continental p6ka. 5o Cf. Ma. ta.la "under, below, down". In cont. Ta. rather M_13.

SOMEFEATURESOF CEYLONTAMIL

135

turappu "key" tu:ttal "to dean, sweep" terama:na "good, straight" te:viley "better" te:!vey "necessity" tohkal "end" naruvica :y "clean" niltira "sleep" nirupa: ka "certainly" netta "blood" neruppatt.i "matchbox" pahka "there" pat.ampa:kka "to go to cinema" paniya "below" paruppama:na "big, grown-up" pareya "to speak ''51 pa:mpuviral "middle finger" pa:sa "language" picattu "to lament" pi~cu "here" pit.avey "saree" pinnukku "back" pipinika:y "cucumber" pirali "mischief" pillu "grass" pile "mistake" putinam "news" puttuvara "chair" puff kut.ikka "bear children"

pelama:ka, pelama: "strongly,

aloud"

pe:ntu "afterwards, then ''~2 poyiley "tobacco" pompale: "woman" manam "mind etc. ''5~ marumofi "answer ''54 mikutiyum "much, very" miccam "abundantly, too much" mukarey "face" mutta:lu "cannot, is impossible" mu:Itavar "elder brother "55 meyam "corpse" me:t.t.imey "arrogance, pride" me:n "son" moel "daughter" mokkeya:na "big" lno'n "son" mo:l. "daughter" reItaco:rey "blood" lettam "blood" valiva:ka ututtu "to adorn" va:ra:vati "bridge" va:ypottu "be silent" (vulg.) vilahku I "beast" vi!a~ku ~ "to understand, comprehend ''5~

vi:acam "bad smell ''ST

5. CONCLUSIONS 5. I. It cannot be denied that Ceylonese TamiI as a major hypersystem bl Cf. an utterance from the Ceylonese Mdrkka.nt.a_n nat.akam: na_n.., katai pa.raint~a? .,,2 pyntu < peyarntu, cf. S. Thananjayarajasingham, op. cO., p. 298. 2a In cont. Ta. rather ma_nacu. ~4 In cont. Ta. rather patil < Urdu badl. 5n Cf. el.eyavar. 56 In cont. Ta. rather puriya. ~7 In cont. Ta. rather na.rram, turna.r_ram.

136

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

of a number (possibly three to four) of subdialects is characterized by a thick bundle of important diagnostic isoglosses concerning the spheres of phonology, morphophonology, morphology, vocabulary and phraseology. The Ceylonese speakers themselves denote the speech of continental Tamils as vat.akkattiyar p~ccu ~s "northern speech". A random comparison of let us say five utterances in (mixed common) Ceylonese Tamil with utterances in the continental (common) colloquial style will at once show great differences in all spheres of grammar and vocabulary. 1. Ce. Ta. [um~6m vi:t.t.Ilsllo:rfl~ kfm.Ant/t:ne:] umatu vi:t.til ello:rum kun.am lame: ,,, Cont. CT [O~gA u:t..tle: yello:r5 SoyAnd/t:ne:] ohka u:tt.le: yello:ron sokaeta:ne: "Is everybody all right in your house?" 2. Ce~ Ta. [/t:r kA~SeykkirMSmkk~t: vAn~l/t:r] a:r kateykkirat, ukka: va~ta:r ,,, Cont. CT [AvArm pe:srA~Smkkm vAnO~t:rm] avaru pe:cratukku va~!a:ru "He [honor.] came to talk". 3. Ce. Ta. [kho:~6i mA~Sureykki ~elluxirMSm:] ko:(di matureykki cellukiratu ~ Cont. CT [reylvA.n.di mMSfireykki po:q,fiiStn:] reylvan, t.i ma!ureykki po:ku!u "The train is going to Madurai". 4. Ce. Ta. [ni: k/t:snnuppln~:lem na:n Ifids,~ VArAm/t:t.t.An] ni: ka:canuppina:lem na:n i~ca varama:t.t.an ,,~ Cont. CT [ni: pAn.AmAnfippn/t:15 n~: n3gs: VArAma:.t.t~:] hi: pan. am anuppna:lon na:n ifike: varama:t.t.e:n "Even if you send money I shall not come here". 5. Ce. Ta. [u.n~!A m~t:n n/t:l.Andeykktu k~t:lAmfireyfle van~ifiruvAn] u~ta ma:n na:!anteykku ka:lamureyile va~turuvan - Cont. CT [wfi: mAy~ nh:.lhn.Ikki kfi:leyle: VAn~iiripp~i:] on maken na:lan, ikki ka:leyle: vag!irippa:n "Your son will come in the morning on the day after tomorrow". 5.2. It remains to point out the truly diagnostic, typical features of Ceylon Tamil as a major hyperdialect, i.e. features constituting isoglosses surrounding the whole island. Without commentary, I give here a list of these features, presented as briefly as possible: 5.21.1. l/t] to [a] initially and in stressed syllables. 2. Almost total absence of prepalatalization o f / e / , /e:/ and of prelabialization o f / o / , / o : / . ~s A Ceylonese Tamilian, coming for the first time to the Indian continent, may be hardly understood by unsophisticated speakers in Tamil villages. He will be asked about his ar, and the following question may be put before him: uhkalut.aiya fir malaiydlama "Are you from Kerala?", i.e. Are you a speaker of Malayalam? On the other hand, the speech of a Tamilian from Ceylon, who had spent a few years on the continent, will be identified on his coming back as something alien; he may be met with remarks like ca:mi pe:cuvatu vatakkattiya tamil "the gentleman speaks northern Tamil".

SOME FEATURES OF CEYLON TAMIL

137

3. Frequent though not quite regular preservation of the (graphic) sequence ai. 4. F i n a l / m / a n d / n / a r e always preserved, there is no nasalization of the preceding (i.e. final) vowel. 5. Existence of a voiceless fricative variant of intervocalic /k/,

viz. [x].
6. Strong aspiration of initial /k, t, p/. 7. Preference of the affricate plosive variant of /c/, at least initially. Merger of/_1/with/1/. 9. Realization of graphic -_n.r- as either [nd] or [n.d]. 5.22.1. Genitive suffix -(n)t.e ~ -(n)t.a / -(n)te ~ -(n)ta. 2. Finite verb suffixes in 1. p.sg. -an 2. p.sg. -ay (Trinc. -a:) (1. p.pl. -am) (3. p.pl. -inam) 3. Preservation in living use of the 2.p. surf. -kr. 5.23.Vocabulary items: tappu "mistake" ippo:[ "now" ka.nakka "well" tara "to give" kaleykka "to speak" nittirey "sleep" pareya "to speak" ka:eu "money" kilame "week" pile "mistake" ket.iya "quickly, suddenly" manam "mind etc." ko;ppi "coffee" marumoli "answer" eella "to go"
~

5.3. It happens quite frequently that, when speaking about Ceylon(ese) Tamil, what authors have really in mind is (one dialect of) Jaffna Tamil. This should of course be avoided. We have demonstrated, first, that in Jaffna there exist some specific features which cannot be found elsewhere in Ceylonese dialects, 5~ and, second, that there are dialects spoken in Ceylon (e.g. that of Batticaloa) which have actually only a few features in common with the Jaffna dialect. According to the present state of our knowledge, it is possible to distinguish at least four local SUB-D~ALECTSof Ceylonese Tamil: ~ORT~ (with Jaffna as centre of prestige), NORT~ EAST (with Trincomalee as centre), SOUTH EAST (with Batticaloa as centre) and possibly COLOMBO,
5~ Prof. F. B. J. Kuiper has indicated the possibility of at least two different forms of speech existing in what is generally called the "Jaffna dialect" (op. cit., 55 etpassim).

138

KAMIL ZVELEBIL

where a mixed variety is spoken. As to the JAFFNA sub-dialect, there are indications that this may itself b e a hypersystem of a number of local and social microsystems, some of them perhaps rather divergent in some features (e.g. the phonetic realization of intervocalic plosives). ~~ The TRINCOMALEEsub-dialect seems to share most features with Jaffna; however, there are without doubt some points that may be regarded as specific and diagnostic only for the North East. 61 The SOUTHEASTERN Ceylonese Tamil (Batticaloa) is certainly a hypersystem of at least two sub-dialects, one spoken by the Tamil speaking Ct_nakar, the other by Batticaloa Hindu Tamilians. In toto, it is the most marginal major dialect of Tamil and this is probably the main reason why it is the most literary-like form of all, especially in having preserved its phonology more "stable" and "steady", i.e. less subject to those processes which are characteristic for the spoken varieties of continental Tamil. Finally, a COLOMBO variety may be probably set up, being a mixed form with Jaffna-like features predominating. The real situation in Ceylon is naturally much more complicated than this brief outline m a y indicate (there must be, e.g., a quite intricate linguistic situation among the Tamil-speaking plantation workers, or a m o n g the Ceylonese Tamilians settled for generations in Badulla, Peradeniya and elsewhere), and what is needed is, therefore, a complete and detailed survey of the whole island. Ceylon is, one should remember, from many points of view an ideal area for the dialectologist, and there is no doubt that the results, reached in a detailed investigation in Ceylon, would be of much use indeed for dialectology as such and even for general linguistics. [Note of the editor: Ce.Ta. kSppi (pp. 123, 130, 134, 137), already used in a Dutch plakkaat of1727 (Tamil Culture, IX/2 (1964), p. 193ff.), is not from Engl. coffee (Tam. Lex., II, p. 1186) but from Dutch koffie (Thanajayarajasingham, TC., pp. 184, 199). Its relation to Cont. Ta. kappi is accordingly parallel to that of -kanttr to apfs (p. 123 n. 24).]

e0 K. Kanapathi Pillai (op. cit. and personal communication) has some strikingly different results from mine (e.g. intervocal. /k/ as [h], and its voiceless realization after nasals). I fail to see any other explanation for this than the obvious fact that our informants were speaking each a different Jaffna local and/or social sub-dialect. 6x E.g. the regular 2. p. sg. surf. -a: seems to be typical only for Trincomalee. The genitive sufftx has probably a slightly different form, too, ending in [~e], viz. [unda~] "your [sg.]." So far I have met with the verb velikkit.a/val.ikkita "to adorn" only in the speech of the Trineomalee informant.