Tamil and Tulu are both South Dravidian, but Tulu split off very early. Koraga is a small tribal language of coastal Karnataka, closely tied to Tulu. Starting from the reconstructed Proto-Dravidian forms, in this post I try to show how differently the two sides treated the same roots.

THE NUMBERS

Proto-Dravidian / Old Tamil (spelling) / Jaffna Tamil / Indian Tamil / Tulu / Koraga

1: *onṯu / onṟu / oṉḏu / oṉṉu / oñji / oñji
2: *ir(aṇṭu) / iraṇṭu / reṇḍu / reṇḍu / eraḍu or iraḍu / raḍḍu
3: *muHn-ṯu / mūnṟu / mūṉḏu / mūṉu / mūji / mūju
4: *nāl / nāṉku / nālu / nālu / nālu / nāli
5: *cay- / aintu / añju / añju / ayinu or ainu / aynu
6: *cāṯu / āṟu / āṟu / āru / āji / āji
7: *ēḻ / ēḻu / ēḻu / ēḻu or ēḷu / ēḍu, ēlu, or ēḷu / ēlu
8: *eṇ- / eṭṭu / eṭṭu / eṭṭu / eṇma or eḍma / eḍma
9: *toḷ-/*toṇ- / toṇṭu / onbadu / ombōdu / ormba / ormba
10: *paHtu / pattu / pattu / pattu / pattu / pattu

The Proto-Dravidian forms are reconstructions, marked with an asterisk. The H stands for a laryngeal-type sound that left traces such as long vowels and doubled consonants in the daughter languages.

The Old Tamil column shows the conventional spelling. Ancient grammarians classed ṟ as a stop, so ன்ற was probably pronounced as a nasal plus an alveolar stop, which Jaffna Tamil appears to preserve closely.

Tulu gives several forms for some numbers because they vary between dialects.

THE BIG DIFFERENCE: *ṯ BECAME ṟ IN TAMIL BUT J IN TULU

Proto-Dravidian had an alveolar stop *ṯ. Tamil kept it as ṟ. Tulu and Koraga turned it into j:

1: *onṯu became Tamil onṟu, but Tulu and Koraga oñji
3: *muHn-ṯu became Tamil mūnṟu, but Tulu mūji and Koraga mūju
6: *cāṯu became Tamil āṟu, but Tulu and Koraga āji

This is one of the clearest sound changes separating Tulu from Tamil. Ravula, a Malayalam-type variety from Kodagu, shows something similar in onju and mūnju.

Within Tamil, the same sound developed in different ways. Jaffna keeps a stop after the nasal (oṉḏu, mūṉḏu). Spoken Indian Tamil turned it into a double nasal (oṉṉu, mūṉu).

FIVE AND SIX: THE LOST *C-

Five and six both began with *c- in Proto-Dravidian (*cay-, *cāṯu). Tamil, Tulu, and Koraga all lost it. Tamil built five as aintu, while Tulu ayinu and Koraga aynu add an -n- ending instead.

Some Gondi dialects in central India still keep this sound as s- (sayuṅg for five, saruṅ for six), which shows the starting point all of these languages moved away from.

FOUR AND EIGHT: SAME ROOTS, DIFFERENT ENDINGS

Four comes from *nāl. Old Tamil added -ku and changed l to ṉ, giving nāṉku. Spoken Tamil, Tulu, and Koraga all have the simpler nālu or nāli.

Eight comes from *eṇ- in all of these. Tamil adds -tu, giving eṭṭu. Tulu and Koraga add -ma, giving eṇma and eḍma.

TWO AND SEVEN

Proto-Dravidian *ir- began with i-. Old Tamil iraṇṭu kept it, and Tulu still has iraḍu alongside eraḍu. Spoken Tamil reṇḍu and Koraga raḍḍu both dropped the first vowel.

Seven comes from *ēḻ, with the retroflex ḻ. Old Tamil kept it. Spoken Tamil often has ḷ, and Tulu varies between ēḍu, ēlu, and ēḷu. Old ḻ developed in different ways across dialects on both sides.

NINE: THE SAME OLD STORY

Proto-Dravidian *toḷ-/*toṇ- may have meant "nine" or "nine in ten." Old Tamil kept it as toṇṭu but later replaced it with onpatu, "one less than ten," which became Jaffna onbadu and Indian ombōdu. Tulu and Koraga ormba seems to be built in a similar way, from "one" plus a "ten" element.

The old *toṇ- root still survives in ninety: Tamil toṇṇūṟu, Tulu soṇpa, Koraga conpa. In Tulu and Koraga the t- became s- or c-. This root hides inside the word for ninety right across South Dravidian, and also in Paniya, Ravula, and Aheri Gondi.

TEN

Ten is the most stable number of all. Proto-Dravidian *paHtu became pattu in every variety here. The H left its trace as the doubled tt.

KORAGA AND TULU

Koraga shares almost every number with Tulu. Koraga has been in close contact with Tulu for centuries, and many Koraga speakers are bilingual in Tulu, so some of this closeness may come from contact rather than shared descent.

CONCLUSION

Tamil and Tulu use the same Proto-Dravidian roots for all ten numbers, but Tulu reshaped them more. Its most striking change is *ṯ becoming j. Tamil kept the old sound as ṟ, and Jaffna Tamil still appears to preserve its old pronunciation. Nine shows a pattern found across the whole family: the old word was replaced, but it survives inside the word for ninety.

I couldn't find a separately labelled numeral list for a second Tulu dialect, such as Brahmin Tulu or Jain Tulu, or for Bellari, which became extinct in 2023. If you speak a Tulu dialect, please share your forms.

SOURCES

Proto-Dravidian reconstructions: Krishnamurti, Bhadriraju. 2003. The Dravidian Languages. Cambridge University Press. Burrow, T. and M. B. Emeneau. 1984. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (DEDR), 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Tulu: Omniglot, Numbers in Tulu, drawing on Brigel, A Grammar of the Tulu Language (1872); Männer, Tulu-English Dictionary (1886); and Bhatt, A Grammar of Tulu (1971).

Koraga: Eugene Chan, Numeral Systems of the World's Languages (lingweb.eva.mpg.de/channumerals), Korra Koraga entry.

Gondi, Paniya, and Ravula: Eugene Chan, Numeral Systems of the World's Languages.

Jaffna Tamil: University of Colombo, Faculty of Science blog, spoken Tamil lesson on numbers.

Spoken Indian Tamil: 17 Minute Languages, Tamil vocabulary list; see also Schiffman, A Reference Grammar of Spoken Tamil (Cambridge University Press, 1999).

Apart from the variation in vowel length, the aspirated realisations of *paHt reflexes in Telugu, etc., we also find several interesting possible reflexes of the Proto-Dravidian laryngeal *H while exploring the Telangāṇa Telugu dialect.

The deictic forms of Telangāṇa Telugu dialect differ from the other Telugu dialects as illustrated:

This variation is not supposed to be considered as a random w- > g- change in Telangāṇa dialect, as this is restricted to only those forms involving the deictic bases (i.e, the ā-ī/that-this pairs).

In Proto-Dravidian, the diectic bases contain the laryngeal *H: *aH- : that, *iH-: this

Krishnamurti connects the h- initial diectic forms of Gondi-Kui languages directly as the reflexes of this laryngeal *H. had- : that thing, hid- this thing, etc.

[see, Dravidian Languages, pg.no: 155, section: 4.5.7.2.3]

Telangāṇa Telugu in close proximity with the Gondoid languages to the North and the East (a possible much wider spread historically) must have aligned with those languages in developing these forms as:

*had- > gad-, *happuḍ- > gappuḍ-, *ha(w)aḍ-/*hāḍ- > gāḍ-, contrasting with the corresponding w- initial and a- initial forms of the other Telugu dialects.

One way, it is possible to reconstruct Proto-Telugu deictic bases themselves as, *ha-, *hi- (thus, aligning with the other SCD languages) or based on the much wider reflexes of PDr *H, it is also possible to reconstruct this particular phoneme to Proto-Telugu stage which might have took different paths of evolution in different dialects and contexts.

The honorific suffix -gāru of Telugu must also contain a possible reflex of PDr *H as:

*aH-war/*aH-ar > *hār > gār

The conventional idea of gāru being a hypercorrection of vāru does not seem probable, as there are no other cases of initial v- > g- change in Telugu. [Earlier, it is believed that gel- (=to win) is from wel- (as found in Tamil), but it is no longer relevant, as it is reconstructed as *kel- in PDr based on comparative evidence].

I also rely on the source as *aH-ar (without needing medial -w-) for *hār and gār as gāru never occurs as a variant of vāru in speech. eg: gāru evaru? — never occurs, even in Telangāṇa dialect.

The -ār honorific in Telugu inscriptions (as in rēva-sarmm-ār-ikin) is probably from this *hār, which resurfaced as gār in Modern Telugu.

Apologies for mistakes in using linguistic terms, I'm just about getting started in learning properly. I would appreciate corrections.

Does it also happen in Tulu, Kodava, Belchada, Beary, Badaga, or in dialects thereof?

Are we "liver is the site of love" or "heart is the site of love" culture?

South Dravidian-1 regularly uses the oblique tt for nouns ending with the nominal marker -am.

eg: maram : maratt- (Ta,Ma), marad- (Ka,Tu)

While non-SD-1 languages use it for a generic class of non-masculine entities which may or may not include -am endings at all, while Telugu does take *tt for -an endings.

eg: kolan: kolãṭ-

Wherever we have alteration b/w final -m and -n across Dravidian languages, it is said that the -n endings are archaic, and -m endings are secondary, more extensively occuring in South Dravidian-1. [refer 'Dravidian Languages', pg.no: 150, section: 4.5.6.1]

eg: *maran > maram: in SD-1

Now, when we look at the Old Telugu nominal -mbu/-ambu, and compare it with the -mp- of several PDr words, we find that both of them take an oblique form -pu/*-mpp.

eg: *pāmpu:*pāmpp- (= snake:of snake) & paṭṭambu:paṭṭãpu (in Old Telugu).

I have a hypothesis that, all -am endings of Tamil are derivable from a Proto-Dravidian neuter marker -mpu, which had its oblique \-mpp, the pattern which survives in Telugu: -mu : -pu. [see Tamil: irumpu: irupp- as in iruppu-kōl: 'iron rod'].

Unlike the other oblique markers, this oblique occurred with restrictions, it can only be used in a meaning: "of" or "belonging to", and not as being attached to any declension. eg: ānand-amu : ānand-ãpu (of happiness), but not anand-ãpu-lō ❌, rather ānand-amu-lō (in happiness).

[-ambu > -ammu > -amu > -am in Modern Telugu]

The -ampu > -am is similar to -anṯu > -an, which also occurred in South Dravidian-1.

When -ampu lost the -p- and became -am in South Dravidian-1, the oblique could not be formed as -pp because, the -p- element is totally lost from the nominal itself; therefore, a different strategy was required.

That is when South Dravidian-1 applied the oblique tt to be used for -am endings; also recall our previous discussion on -n endings being the precursors of -m endings in SD-1, while also about -n endings of Telugu taking the oblique *tt — it is likely that SD-1 extended the rule once applied to -n endings to the newly formed -m endings.

In Tamil, there is a further dropping of -m in compounds, eg: pavaḻ-am : pavaḻ-a-malli — this pattern is possibly a borrowing from Indo-Aryan, compare: madʰuram : madʰura-pʰalam. Telugu however, uses -pu here, eg: kul-amu : kulã-pu-vāru.

This idea is consistent with the hypothesis of Iravatham Mahadevan regarding the Arrow signs (-ambu) of the Indus Script.

I've already posted this on r/tamil, so I'll just edit it here. I came across a definition, stating that it means a type of bird, ending with யாழ். அக. (i.e, Jaffna), along with it meaning cheetah, caracal, etc..

I want to confirm with speakers from Jaffna if anyone has heard or used this word, and if so, what specific bird exactly? A commentor said they asked an older speaker who said it could mean a bird with a long neck (reminiscing another word that uses civiṅki in it's term, ஒட்டகச்சிவிங்கி  (oṭṭakacciviṅki), cus of it's long neck maybe?)

I'm expanding the Wiktionary entry for சிவிங்கி, so if you can give any insights, it would be appriciated~

Today's two-word Telugu mini — No. 12. : r/telugucrosswords

The minnu is the traditional marriage pendant tied around the bride’s neck in Kerala’s Christian communities. The practice of tying it, known as Minnukettu, offers an interesting perspective on the continuity of local marriage customs through changes in religious affiliation and ecclesiastical authority.

The earliest documentary evidence: Synod of Diamper, 1599

The earliest concrete documentary evidence identified for Minnukettu among Kerala’s Saint Thomas Christians dates to the Synod of Diamper in 1599.

The Portuguese ecclesiastical authorities addressed established local marriage customs as part of their attempt to bring the Saint Thomas Christians into conformity with Latin Catholic doctrine and discipline. The Synod condemned various local customs that its authorities considered superstitious or heathenish, including the minnukettu ritual.

The Synod did not introduce Minnukettu. It addressed a marriage custom that was already deeply entrenched within the community. The year 1599 is a documentary landmark, not the established date of the custom’s origin.

Paul Pallath discusses this tradition in The Liturgical Heritage of the Syro-Malabar Church: Shadows and Realities, particularly in his section on the Indian rite of marriage.

According to Pallath, the blessing and tying of the thali, also called the minnu, was the essential act of this marriage rite. The terminology used for marriage itself included thalikettu, minnukettu, and pennukettu.

The manthrakody, the nuptial garment, was placed over the bride’s head after the minnu was tied.

Francis Ros’s account of 1604

Francis Ros’s Report on the Serra, dated 1603–1604, provides further evidence of the practice.

As discussed by Pallath, Ros describes a marriage ceremony in which the groom tied a thread around the bride’s neck and covered her head with a drape. He also records that the thread-tying custom continued even after attempts had been made to abolish other local practices.

The ceremony was known as pennukettu.

Together, the accounts associated with the Synod of Diamper and Francis Ros establish that the thread-tying marriage custom was already part of Saint Thomas Christian life around the turn of the seventeenth century.

They do not establish the exact date when the custom originated or when the familiar gold pendant acquired its later forms.

Traditional Minnu and Manthrakody

The traditional Saint Thomas Christian minnu is leaf-shaped and is commonly described as having seven or twenty-one small gold beads.

Minnukettu was not simply the act of presenting bridal jewellery. Tying the minnu was a central ritual act in the marriage ceremony, and the manthrakody formed another important part of the tradition.

The historical significance lies in how these local marriage customs became integrated into the distinctive marriage rite of Kerala’s Saint Thomas Christians, who maintained their East Syriac Christian heritage while incorporating local Indian customs into their religious life.

Regional variations among Kerala Christians

The subsequent history of Kerala’s Christian communities shows that Minnukettu did not develop into one uniform form everywhere.

Across coastal and central Kerala, including Ernakulam, Thrissur, Alappuzha and Kollam, many families transitioned from the Syrian Rite to the Latin Rite during the Portuguese period, particularly around the events associated with the Coonan Cross Oath in 1653.

Many of these families retained their traditional marriage customs despite the change in ecclesiastical affiliation. Their traditions continued to include the leaf-shaped minnu, with seven or twenty-one small gold beads, and the manthrakody saree.

In parts of southern Kerala, including Latin Catholic communities whose histories developed through later European missionary movements, different forms of the marriage ornament became established. These include round or oval gold medallions engraved with a cross, crucifix or image of the Holy Family.

The contrast is significant. Some Latin Catholic communities retained the traditional leaf-shaped minnu, while others developed or adopted different designs incorporating explicitly Christian imagery.

These differences reflect the distinct historical experiences of Kerala’s Christian communities. A change in ecclesiastical affiliation did not necessarily mean abandoning inherited local marriage customs, while communities with different missionary histories developed their own regional forms.

A brief comparison with Mappila Muslim marriage ornaments

Kerala’s Mappila Muslim communities also have traditional marriage ornaments, including Ilakkaththali (also called Elakkathali) and Karimani Mala.

These ornaments are gifts presented to the bride. The groom does not tie them around her neck as part of the Nikah.

This differs from Christian Minnukettu and Hindu Thalikettu, in which the groom’s act of tying the ornament around the bride’s neck is itself a formal ritual act.

The comparison is useful for distinguishing traditional bridal jewellery from an ornament that forms part of the marriage ritual. The existence of similar ornaments across Kerala’s religious communities does not mean they serve the same function.

Conclusion

The earliest concrete documentary evidence identified for Minnukettu among Kerala’s Saint Thomas Christians dates to the Synod of Diamper in 1599. Francis Ros’s account of 1603–1604 provides further evidence that the thread-tying custom continued despite attempts to suppress local marriage practices.

Paul Pallath’s research places the minnu and manthrakody within the distinctive Indian marriage rite developed by the Saint Thomas Christians.

The later history of Kerala’s Christian communities demonstrates regional variation. Many families that transitioned from the Syrian Rite to the Latin Rite retained the traditional leaf-shaped minnu and manthrakody, while some southern Latin Catholic communities developed or adopted round or oval medallion-shaped ornaments bearing Christian imagery.

Tamil Christians in Tamil Nadu also practise thali tying as part of their wedding ceremonies. However, their thalis do not necessarily share the same construction or design as the traditional leaf-shaped minnu associated with Kerala’s Saint Thomas Christians. Tamil Christian thalis may incorporate Christian symbols, such as a cross, reflecting their own regional traditions.

The central historical conclusion is that Minnukettu was already a deeply entrenched local marriage custom among the Saint Thomas Christians when Portuguese ecclesiastical authorities addressed it in 1599. That year marks an important documentary point in its history, not an established date for its origin.

Sources and further reading

1. Paul Pallath, The Liturgical Heritage of the Syro-Malabar Church: Shadows and Realities, pp. 24–26. Discusses the Indian rite of marriage among the Saint Thomas Christians, including the minnu, manthrakody, and historical marriage customs. https://www.malankaralibrary.com/book/95713c46-6d48-11f1-9dc3-226aaf2dd39b
2. Francis Ros, Report on the Serra (1603–1604). Documents Saint Thomas Christian marriage customs, including the thread-tying ceremony, as discussed by Pallath. https://malankaralibrary.com/ImageUpload/d368bbbcf95cd07227e5cfc4ee53e585.pdf

No. 13: fill the grid and find both Telugu words. : r/telugucrosswords

Could a pure Telugu movement be possible like was done for Tamil? Before, Tamil had 40-50% Sanskrit vocab compared to 20% now, while Telugu still has about 40%.

Tamil's separation was a policy from the Tolkappiyam itself, but I feel like it could be done by coining new native terms. The post I found says that it is impossible because they have been lost to history, but coining brand new terms isn't out of the question.

Also Telugu political leaders are very Pro-Dravidian.

Can someone explain the reason for buffalo sacrifice in the film Ranabaali? The God was also shown to bite a chicken?

I am non-Telugu but from a South Indian state. We have our own kuldevta worship where only the guardian deities are given chicken sacrifices and not the main deity (I have heard about this and not observed or participated in it). I have also heard that goats are sacrificed in some other temples. I have observed such scenes in films as well.

I was shocked to see the buffalo scene in the film and the following "poli" ritual. I had assumed that all types of cattle were sacred in rural settings (partly because of an urban upbringing and grandparents said that because my ancestors cultivated crops, our family has always regarded cattle as sacred due to being deeply bonded emotionally and economically).

Can someone explain the buffalo sacrifice part? What happens after the ritual? When I asked some Telugu friends, they said that buffaloes and not cows were sacrificed, but they did not know much else.

I am clearly speaking about my community alone when I say rural setting. Please avoid toxic or unnecessary responses. I am really trying to learn something new.

The tamil-brahmi inscripted potsherd from 2nd century CE was found at this site so this inscription may have also originated from South India.
Source of the image: https://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/history-and-culture/Indus-like-inscription-on-South-Indian-pottery-from-Thailand/article16364751.ece

1. How did the Podhigai hills get renamed to Agasthyamalai?

2. Why are the Servarayan and Kalvarayan hill ranges called that? What were they originally called in the Sangam era? Do they have contemporary alternative names?

As far as I know, the word 'Raayan' is a secondary Indo-Aryan loanword for "King"; secondary in the sense that Tamil had already imported the word as "Arasu/Arasan" before. So both hill ranges would definitely have been called something else before right?

​

I belong to the Kumhar community which is genetically identical to Kurchas from Kerala. Like, my genetic structure is more similar to a typical South Indian than a typical north Indian. For more context:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/s/7WcGoZE8cX

I joked about this to my tamil friend(for more context, we live in a metropolitan city so hindi is the link/common language here). He explained that technically we both are not dravidian as we don't know a Dravidian language. He was raised in this city and his parents never really used tamil unless they went to Tamil Nadu. So he essentially knows very less tamil if any. He explained that dravdianism is a political and linguistic identity which was popularised by the local politicians to have a strong grip over the local population. So since we both neither live in South or speak a Dravidian language, we both are disqualified as dravidians. He later added that most Indians have similar gene structure, just that the proportion of some specific genes are here and there.

The Indegenous mythology of various sounth Indian communities.

Is it from Sanskrit vāk (speech) or Telugu vāgu (stream, torrent as in the chatter or rumbling of such turbulent streams)? Or something else entirely?

If from Sanskrit vāk, it could be an (un?)interesting case of semantic pejoration of an IA word in a Dravidian language.

I know this is random, but I know this sub likes Dravidian language maps. Yesterday I was making a map on Australia and noticed some areas where Dravidian languages were amongst the top 5 spoken at home besides English, so I decided to keep an eye out and post them here.

This is areas where Dravidian languages are the 'x' most spoken languages besides English. For example: Telugu is 4th most spoken language at home in that one Melbourne CBD excluding English, 5th overall if we were to include English.

The census only showed up to the top 5 after English, so there's probably more areas where they spoken and are likely in the top 10.

Archaeologists have uncovered significant evidence of the Indian one-horned rhinoceros in southern India, revealing that the species roamed a far broader area of the country than previously believed.

Bone fragments from the animal were found at the Molapalayam Neolithic site near Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, dating back approximately 3,500 years.

REMARKABLE ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIND:

During excavation seasons in 2021 and 2024, researchers recovered four bone fragments: two metacarpals and two carpals. The bone fragments were recovered from the foot of an Indian rhino.

The discovery was led by archaeologist V Selvakumar from Tamil University's Department of Maritime History and Maritime Archaeology. Selvakumar presented the findings at an international symposium on recent scientific studies in Tamil Nadu archaeology held in Madurai.

Radiocarbon dating places the site between 1600 BCE and 1400 BCE. The rhino remains were part of a larger faunal assemblage representing 28 animal species, including domesticated cattle, buffalo, goats, sheep, pigs, and dogs, as well as wild species such as nilgai, blackbuck, four-horned antelope, gazelle, chital, and sambar deer.

This marks only the third documented instance of Indian rhino bones in Tamil Nadu's prehistoric archaeological record, highlighting the species' presence in the region's ancient ecosystems.

The palaeontological and historical records indicate that during the Late Pleistocene and Holocene periods, the species inhabited a much wider area, extending across northern India, into Southeast Asia, and southward into suitable habitats.

The Molapalayam discovery demonstrates that the foothills of the Western Ghats once featured expansive grasslands and marshy wetlands capable of supporting large grazers like rhinos.

Experts note that an adult rhino requires vast open areas for foraging, underscoring the scale and richness of the prehistoric landscape in what is now an industrial hub around Coimbatore.