Periyar about tamil language

Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, a prominent Dravidian social reformer and founder of the Self-Respect Movement and Dravidar Kazhagam, had a complex and often contradictory stance toward the Tamil language. His views reflect both his deep appreciation for its cultural significance and his critical perspective on its limitations, shaped by his broader goals of rationalism, social reform, and resistance to linguistic imposition. On one hand, Periyar celebrated Tamil as a unifying force for the Dravidian people. He emphasized the importance of loving one’s mother tongue, famously stating, "The love of one's tongue is the foremost of all loves that are required of the people born in our land." He believed that Tamil could serve as a foundation for Dravidian identity and unity, asserting that it, along with Telugu, Malayalam, and Kannada, originated from a common "mother language of Old Tamil." In this context, he saw Tamil as a tool to resist North Indian domination, particularly the imposition of Hindi, which he viewed as a symbol of Aryan-Brahminical hegemony. He argued that fostering Tamil would enlighten people, enrich the language, and contribute to the progress and freedom of the Dravidian community. On the other hand, Periyar was sharply critical of Tamil, at times calling it a "barbarian language" or "kaatumiraandi mozhi." This critique stemmed from his belief that Tamil, in its traditional form, was outdated and insufficiently evolved to meet modern scientific and rational needs. He pointed to its lack of feminine verbal forms and its heavy influence from Sanskrit as structural flaws. For instance, in his journal Viduthalai (October 11, 1967), he remarked that Tamil’s antiquity—often boasted as spanning 3,000 to 4,000 years—was precisely why he considered it primitive, arguing that clinging to old glories hindered progress. He even went so far as to say, "Tamil is a language that is not even useful for begging," reflecting his frustration with its perceived stagnation. Periyar’s criticisms were not merely dismissive; they were tied to his reformist agenda. He advocated for Tamil alphabet reform to modernize the language, proposing changes to simplify its script and adapt it to printing technology. He suggested altering letters like the vowel "ஈ" (i) and reducing the number of characters, arguing that ancient languages required updates to remain relevant in a changing world. Despite his harsh words, he believed Tamil had potential, noting its rich arts, customs, traditions, and vocabulary as assets that could outshine many other Indian languages if properly developed. Additionally, Periyar’s views on Tamil were influenced by his pragmatic support for English. He saw English as a "tool to power" and a means to connect Tamils to global progress, often favoring it over Tamil for practical communication. This stance led him to suggest replacing Tamil with English at home, a position that contrasted sharply with his opposition to Hindi and his promotion of Dravidian linguistic pride. In summary, Periyar’s perspective on Tamil was dual-natured: he valued it as a cultural and political symbol of Dravidian identity while criticizing its traditional form as a barrier to modernity and rationalism. His controversial remarks, like calling it a "barbarian language," were meant to provoke reform rather than outright rejection, though they remain a point of contention among his admirers and critics alike. His legacy in Tamil Nadu reflects this complexity—revered for his social justice efforts, his linguistic views are often debated but rarely the sole basis of his enduring influence.