The claim that looks extraordinary is pretty straightforward and wd be so for every body who reads
Rigveda and understands making of words, this is just a tip of iceberg that i opened up, rest wd
come in proper forum in appropriate manner,I wd correct and change the entire dogmatic views
thats created in last 150 Yrs.
[You appear to be thinking that any language which was not written down or otherwise recorded
didn't exist. This is obvious nonsense: writing has been unknown during the vast majority of
the time humans have known language, and regardless thousands of languages have lived and died
alongside for thousands of years. (Or if not, then where from did all the thousands of recorded
languages spring into being, upon the dawn of written history in each part of the world?) Absense of
proof is not proof of absense]
I think differently than your assumption, I wd rather present another perspective in the line of sense
you ventured into, the belief made by western scholars that Vedic people who made Vedas and other
vedic literature has been unaware of writing is a utter nonsense.
Do you know that Yajurveda and a few Brahaman scriputurs preserve system of making
variable for denoting numeric values that was used in making sankrit meters and altars as
per the algorithems designed, this vedic Do system is comparable to current system of variables
say - X for 01, Y for 02, Z for 03 etc, respond back with your view, study and belief on it, lets
know, if variables can even be thought of without a system of writing in place, without a script.
[The default position to hold should be that of inertia: Dravidian languages exist as separate now,
therefore they existed as separate earlier]
Yes, however, note that Its already highlighted a sanskrit speaking Vedic Rishi Agastya shaped
up Tamil in the form of a structured language backed up by grammar by initiating Sangam
movement, however, stating that Tamil is a language existed even before existence of Sanskrit
is no more than a blind belief as far as textual evidences goes and available in both Sanskrit and
Tamil.
However, your argument is pretty generic, in the 20th century, grammars are written afresh for
many dialects in India and such dialects got status of language, Munda is one of such dialect,
therefore, saying that that what exists as seperate now has had seperate existance earlier also
is not always true.
Lalit Mishra