Are we about to make a truely fantastic discovery????

Post Reply New Topic

Interesting question. The answer may be yes. But I will have to discuss something very strange. I died when I was around age 3 or 4. A large bull which weighed over 1,000 pounds attacked me. I weighed around 15 pounds at the time. It was like being attacked by a dinosaur. I woke up several hours later. I had no knowledge of what happened to me. I stood there looking at my dead body. My parents had place me on my bed inside my home. I stood next to my body. My parents were in utter horror and terror. Their first born son had died. I could see their fear. But a voice spoke and said "Live or Die, Choose?" I couldn't allow the pain I saw in the faces of my parents, so I said Live.

I had experience what is normally defined as a near death experience.

So who was this voice? In my religion, I was baptized soon after birth. In the ceremony I was given a Guardian Angel to help me and lead me down my journey of life. Every once and a while, my Guardian Angel speaks with me. These are at key times in my life. He speaks in a very calm way and helps me make key decisions. Many times they infuse a different perspective of life and how to look at something I am about to do or not do. And a voice would talk to me and I would understand. This is the voice of my Guardian Angel. I make the final decisions but it is nice to have an angel at my side.

I believe Tamil was the original language of the Indian subcontinent. Although the number has dwindled over the millenia, languages genetically connected to tamil in India actually amount to 250 million and spread from the border of Iran (the original homeland of Dravidian-Elamite) all the way to Sri Lanka.

Yes the author is being cautious that this is a myth, but myths/legends have a core of truth to them when you remove the fancyful bits. there were tamil poetry called Sangams which tell of great academies. The first Sangam (mutaṟcaṅkam) is described as having been held at "the Madurai which was submerged by the sea", or known among historians as Kapatapuram, lasted a total of 4400 years, and had 549 members, which supposedly included some gods of the Hindu pantheon such as Siva, Kubera, Murugan and the great tamil sage Agastya. A city was found submerged in Pondicherry and according to the location, has been popularly credited as being the site for the first Sangam, Kapatapuram.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendary ... %20culture.

Yes the lifespan of humans prior to the great flood was considerably long. Methusalah comes to mind. Again, the belief that the people who existed before the flood included those who were "hybrids" who were purged during the cataclysm (in the bible there were many cataclysms mentioned).

Yes children have many experiences they can't explain, ultimately an NDE is a personal experience. My daughter used to have night terrors being along in her room. When she was 3/4 (about the same age as you) she communicated (she was largely non-verbal but used single words) she was scared to sleep at night. Often come to our bedroom, But then she stopped. When she was 5-6 and began speaking she drew pictures of an imaginary friend she had. When I asked who this was, she said when she was alone at night time "he" used to come and stay with her and keep her company until she fell asleep. the problem was, the friend she drew looked like a grey alien? she even had a name, he called himself "Bim" the "Kalabom". Even now she's 19, she herself doesn't want to talk about her childhood experiences but when I show her pic of a grey she will automatically say oh that's Bim and roll her eyes.

Yes, it sounds like her guardian angel. A very advanced being assigned to protect her along her journey through life.

Yes I expected her to draw a "companion" like what a little girl would imagine, she had no frame of reference to draw a grey alien since her tv was highly regulated at the time and she hadn't started kinder.

It's worth noting that Dravidian-Elamite is an unproven hypothesis. Elamite is generally accepted by scholars to be a language isolate, unrelated to any other known language. This doesn't mean it can't be related to them, only that a solid case has yet to be made for a relationship. This is also true for a lot of other attempts at linking languages that are only at best distantly related, like the Nostratic hypothesis.

Beyond that, it's probably inaccurate to describe Tamil as the original language of the Indian subcontinent and more accurate to view Tamil as one of the descendants of the original language(s) spoken in the subcontinent, with Telugu as another descendant of that earlier language. Kannata and Malayalam are both part of the same branch as Tamil, but both preserve more archaic features compared to modern Tamil.

Proto-Dravidian is an attempt at reconstructing the earlier language. South Dravidian I is considered the ancestor of Tamil (and many others), South Dravidian II is considered the ancestor of Telugu (and many others), there's also Central and Northern branches.

It's probably most accurate to say that Dravidian languages were the original languages of the subcontinent, rather than specifying a specific modern language like Tamil, Telugu, Kannata, etc.

My wife speaks tamil (a language I have tried but failed to learn). I have, however, spent some years studying the history and archaeology of the language though.

the origin of the word "dravidian" is a sanksritised version of the word "tamil". the word drāviḍa in Sanskrit has been historically used to denote geographical regions of southern India
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian ... India%20as

If you speak to any tamil person (and i've known plenty from living in Malaysia) and they unanimously believe tamil as a language has remained pure over millennia and they are fanatically obsessed about the purity of their language. tamil is one of the few living languages where if you took a time machine to 2500 years ago you would be able to speak comfortably to another tamil person and (this is important) their cultural/religious frame of reference would still be relatable.

More importantly, what do linguists have to say about the development of the Tamil language?

Not wishing to offend the Tamil speakers, but apparently, the order of appearance was: Proto Tamil, followed by Old Tamil, then Middle Tamil and then Modern Tamil.

There are no languages that don't change, but there are prescriptivists that try to halter that change and keep it artificially "pure" for whatever reasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tamil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Tamil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_language

It's in the too hard basket. Linguists claim the language is an isolate (not related to any other language) but I am intrigued at the weird similarity between tamil and two other languages, Japanese and Korean. While the latter are not considered viable connections by linguists, a number of Japanese and tamil academics have noted the unusual similarity in vocabulary that technically don't make sense unless the peoples were in direct contact with each other thousands of years ago.
https://owlcation.com/humanities/The-Cu ... -and-Tamil

So proto-tamil is a just a concept. It can't be demonstrated to have existed. If you read the article it says - Despite the significant amount of grammatical and syntactical change between Old, Middle and Modern Tamil, Tamil demonstrates grammatical continuity across these stages: many characteristics of the later stages of the language have their roots in features of Old Tamil. The Tamil from the Sangam period (old tamil) is still mutually intelligible to a degree by modern Tamil speakers.

One important point here is that the oldest written tamil are from the period around the birth of christ written in a script called "tamil Brahmi". Brahmi is a script that is likely not indigenous to India,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmi_script
this means we don't actually know if the rules of this script actually match how the language was spoken by the common tamil man. Case in point is English was never a written language until it was translated from Latin script.

Extract your head from your rear end and keep your facts straight please.

Basque is a "linguistic isolate" (has no known language cousins).

Tamil is NOT "a linguist isolate" any more than English is. And no linguist claims that it is. Tamil is part of the Dravidian language family that covers the southern third of India. Its many cousins include Malayam, Telugu, Kannada, and Brahui. Other languages of neighboring provinces of southern India.

Yes there are Utubers that talk about odd similarities in vocabulary between Dravidian languages and Korean. But those could be either pure chance, or even some borrowing (the Tamils were the main seafarers in the Indian Ocean in Greco-Roman times) if Hebrew and Thai have some Tamil loan words from that time then Korean might.

A thousand years ago you would pronounce all of the "silent e's" in English. So the word "name" was pronounced "nam-ee" which is exactly how the modern Japanese word for "name" (nami) is pronounced. Pure coincidence.

Sorry according to tamil speakers there is no such thing as "dravidian". tamil was (according to them) spoken throughout the Indian continent but due to the incursion of Indo-European language speakers was pushed to the southern peninsula or India. Case in point is Malayalam, which like telugu and Kannada became influenced by Sanskrit. However malayalam is relatively more recent and we know historically Malayalam did not exist prior to the arrival of brahmins in on the south west coast who changed the way the vocabulary of the language so it became different to tamil. telugu and Kannada have been exposed to sanskritisation much longer so are now no longer intelligible to tamil.

the existence of the one isolate Brahui on the border of Iran and Pakistan actually proves that tamil was once spoken all the way to Iran.

Sorry, but we all see through your BS and see how you are contradicting yourself.

You said Western "linguists" say that Tamil is an "isolate" which they do not. They say its part of the Dravidian language family.

Now you're changing your tune are admitting that western experts dont say that, but are pitting the Tamil locals against Western linguists by saying its the locals who are ethnocentric about their language in opposition to Westerners.

The Dravidian language family was the original paint that covered the whole subcontinent of India (the Indus Valley Civilization was probably Dravidian speaking) for thousands of years. The Indoeuropean intruders covered the northern two thirds in Sanskrit (which evolved into the modern Indoeuropean Pakrit languages of the north). But even that was thousands of years ago. So the remaining Dravidian languages would evolve away from each other in the time. As well as both give and receive foreign influences.

What you're claiming is like saying that "there is no English language, and that English is really Dutch that got debased by French after the Norman Conquest of 1066".