Australian Aboriginals and Tamils
Maravnapulavu K. Sachithananthan
Robert Caldwell (1856) refers to the remarkable general resemblances between the Dravidian pronouns and those of aboriginal tribes of Southern and Western Australia, (p.51-53, Comparative Grammar, 1856).
கந்தன் வந்தான், அவன் இருந்தான். அவன் = pronoun,
மாடு வந்தது, அது படுத்தது. அது = pronoun
Aboriginal pronouns have number, person, gender, and case
தன்மை ஒருமை
I = நான் = Ngadhu
My = என்னது Ngaddhi
Me = அதுநான் = Dhi
முன்னிலை ஒருமை
You = நீ = Ngindu
Your = உனது = Niginya
You = நின்னது = Nu
படர்க்கை ஒருமை
He = அவன் = Ngillu
His =அவனது Ngigula
Him = நுனது = Lugu
W. H. Bleek (1872) in his paper, On the position of Australian Languages discusses the close resemblances between Australian Koori and Dravidian languages.
Jonathan Harrington (b.1958), Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney in his research article The Phonetics and Phonology of Australian Aboriginal languages published two table-charts on the vowels and consonants of Australian Aboriginal languages, assigning International Phonetic Association (IPA) alphabets.
Punal K. Murugaiyan (2009) prepared a chart assigning Tamil alphabets to IPA alphabets. I used his chart in preparing the Tamil equivalents of Aboriginal vowels and consonants.
R. H. Mathews (1841-1918) in his The Wailwan Language in pages 171, 172 indicates the agglutinative nature of Wailawan language. I have added the possible Tamil equivalents.
The verbs have number, person, tense, and everyday mood. Like the pronouns, they have inclusive and exclusive endings to express the dual or the plural in the first person.
அடி = கும்மு = gumulli
நிகழ்காலம் ஆண்பால்
தன்மை = I hit = அடிக்கிறேன் = கும்முறான் = Gumurra-dhu
முன்னிலை You hit =அடிக்கிறாய் = கும்முறாய் = Gumurra-ndu
படர்க்கை = He hits = அடிக்கிறான் = கும்முறான் = Gumurra-lu
நிகழ்காலம் பலர்பால்
தன்மை We hit = அடிக்கிறோம் = கும்முறோம் = Gumurr
முன்னிலை You hit = அடிக்கிறீர்கள் = கும்முறீர்கள் = Gumurra-ndugal
படர்க்கை = They hit = அடிக்கிறார்கள் = கும்முறார்கள் = Gumurra-lugal
The past and future forms of verbs have endings that vary according to whether the action was of longer or shorter duration. These different endings stay the same for all persons, whether in the singular, dual or plural. By adding the necessary pronominal suffix, the verb acquires a special ending for each person and each number of all the tenses, as shown by the conjugation of the indicative present given above.
கடந்த காலம் ஒன்றன்பால், தன்மை
I hit this morning = அடித்தேன் = Gume ngurranyedhu
I hit yesterday = அடித்தனான் =Gume gumbirradhu
I hit long time ago = அடித்துள்ளேன் = Gume ngargambodhu
எதிர்காலம் ஒன்றன்பால் தன்மை
I will hit, straight away = அடித்திடுவேன் = Gumulla-galladhu
I will hit tomorrow = அடிப்பேன் = Gumulngurriagadhu
I will hit, soon = அடிக்கவுள்ளேன் = Gumullagawandugagadhu
R. M. W. Dixon (1980) discusses the wider affiliation of Australian languages to assert that the Dravidian suggestion deserves to be taken seriously in, The languages of Australia (p.236)
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day discusses the agglutinative nature of the Dravidian and Tasmanian languages and goes on to say that fishermen of the Coramendal coast will easily pick up words spoken by Tasmanian aboriginals (p.120)
There are many such notices on linguistic and other similarities. Padma Subramaniam, the dancer from Tamil Nadu, R. Mathivanan, P. Ramanathan, Sutha Seshaiyan, researchers in Tamilnadu and Mathahlai Somu, writer from Australia have touched upon this subject in the course of their treatises on Tamil ancestry.
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day discussing the social face of love among aboriginals of Australia brings out a Dravidian connection (p.161).
Per Hage (2001) uses linguistic evidence to support her views on The Evolution of Dravidian Kinship Systems in Oceania, including the aboriginals of Australia. She quotes N. J. Allen extensively, using Allen’s world historical theory of kinship where the humanity began with a tetradic-Dravidian system.
Dravidian system of kinship encourages cross-cousin marriages. The brother of the mother is given priority status in family ceremonies.
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day points to the physical resemblance of the Dravidians to the aboriginals of Australia indicating a racial similarity, goes on to clarify as to why modern anthropologists conveniently disregard it (p.121).
Spencer Wells (1969) in his Deep Ancestry describes how Ramasamy Pitchappan showed closer linkages using Y-chromosome markers (p.124). The Piraan Malai Kallar community near Madurai carries a piece of genetic trail as a direct genetic link to the Aboriginal community of Australia.
Josephine Flood (2006) discusses the biological angle in The Original Australians, Story of the Aboriginal People (p.185) quoting the work of Alan Redd and Mark Stoneking. These two geneticists studied Mitochondrion Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid from present day aboriginals to find that they are ten times closer to Indians than to New Guineans. They estimated that the time of separation of Australian Aboriginals from southern Indians was at 3390 years with 95% certainty. Josephine also quotes the study of geneticists Pellekaan linking southern Indians with Australian Aboriginals.
Migrants from South India settled in Australia 4,000 years before Captain Cook's arrival (and they took their dingos with them) Australia was settled by a wave of immigrants from South India little more than 4,000 years ago, a genetic study shows.
The finding overturns the view that the continent was isolated from the time it was first colonised about 45,000-50,000 years ago, until Europeans discovered Australia in the eighteenth century.
DNA evidence suggests that rather than complete most of the journey over several generations by foot, the Tamil South Indian migrants came over by boat. By the time the Tamil South Indian settlers reached Australia the ancient land bridge was under water so they sailed.
Australia’s first human colonisation was the culmination of the long walk out of Africa by the human species. Humans are believed to have left Africa, via the Arabian coast and through South India before reaching Indonesia and New Guinea and finally over an ancient land bridge to Australia. Following their arrival there was, according to ‘the prevailing view’, little if any contact between Australia’s Aboriginal inhabitants and the rest of the world.
Analysis of DNA samples from Aboriginal people living in the Northern Territories of Australia today shows that they have up to 11 per cent of their genetic heritage is Tamil South Indian. The new settlers came from South India and the lack of their DNA in other parts of Asia suggests they sailed directly across the Indian Ocean rather than work their way towards Australia by foot.
Scientists found strong evidence of a wave of settlers from South India reaching Australia 141 generations ago. Aboriginals who took part in the study were found to have up to 11 per cent of their DNA from Tamil South Indian descent.
Intriguingly, their arrival corresponds to evidence in the archaeological record that shows dingos reached Australia about the same time, suggesting they may have been transported by boat by the human settlers.
Dr Irina Pugach, of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, said the international research team calculated that the Tamil South Indian DNA reached the Aboriginal population 141 generations ago. Assuming that each generation is separated on average by 30 years the geneticists were able to conclude that the Tamil South Indian population arrived on in Australia 4230 years ago.
‘Interestingly this date also coincides with many changes in the archaeological record of Australia, which include a sudden change in plant processing and stone tool technologies, with microliths appearing for the first time, and the first appearance of the dingo in the fossil record,’ she said.
‘Since we detect inflow of genes from South India into Australia at around the same time, it is likely that these changes were related to this migration.’
Mark Stoneking, a geneticist at the Max Planck Institute, led the study and told Nature magazine: ‘Australia is thought to represent one of the earliest migrations for humans after they left Africa, but it seemed pretty isolated after that.’
DNA from 344 people was analysed for the study, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Samples were taken from people in Papua New Guinea, South East Asia, China, the US and Australia’s Northern Territory.
The dingo is thought to have reached Australia with humans about 4,230 years ago.
In almost all these treatises, authors have taken pains to show diagrammatically the migration of humans between southern India and Australia.
These diagrams conceptually converge with the Tamil thought process - from Simon Casie Chetty through Na. Si. Kanthaia Pillai to Maraimalai Adikal, Neelakanta Sastri and K. K.Pillai on the once prosperous Tamilian land mass of Kumari Kandam, otherwise known as Lemuria. These and many other Tamil scholars have sourced from linguistic and literary master pieces of the Sangam and post Sangam era to write and discuss about this supposedly disappeared land mass.
Political process
1926 David Unaipon called for increased Indigenous autonomy and representation
1927 Fred Maynard called for equality, equal citizenship rights and control of indigenous affairs
1933 Joe Anderson, the great King of Burraga, chief of the Thurawal tribes urged for representation in the Federal Parliament.
1937 William Cooper petitioned for representation in Parliament.
1946 Doug Nicholls did the same.
1963 Yirrkala Bark asked the government to consult Yolngu people before making decisions about their land and lives.
1967 Referendum, when a majority of Australians voted to amend the Constitution to recognize Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander peoples as part of the Australian Nation.
1988 Galarrwuy Yunipingu presented the Barunga Statement to the Prime Minister, calling for a treaty to recognize the rights of the Indigenous people and their rights to self-determination and self-management.
1992 Mabo vs Queensland High Court recognized native title lands.
2008 Apology to the Stolen Generation by Kevin Rudd. Galarrwuy Yunipingu, Dilak of Yolngu asked Kevin Rudd to constitutionally recognize Indigenous rights.
So far only 4 aboriginals reached the Federal Parliament as members
Ken Wyatt from WA
Senator Neville Bonner Queensland
Senator Aden Ridgeway NSW
Senator Nova Peris NT
Maravnapulavu K. Sachithananthan
Robert Caldwell (1856) refers to the remarkable general resemblances between the Dravidian pronouns and those of aboriginal tribes of Southern and Western Australia, (p.51-53, Comparative Grammar, 1856).
கந்தன் வந்தான், அவன் இருந்தான். அவன் = pronoun,
மாடு வந்தது, அது படுத்தது. அது = pronoun
Aboriginal pronouns have number, person, gender, and case
தன்மை ஒருமை
I = நான் = Ngadhu
My = என்னது Ngaddhi
Me = அதுநான் = Dhi
முன்னிலை ஒருமை
You = நீ = Ngindu
Your = உனது = Niginya
You = நின்னது = Nu
படர்க்கை ஒருமை
He = அவன் = Ngillu
His =அவனது Ngigula
Him = நுனது = Lugu
W. H. Bleek (1872) in his paper, On the position of Australian Languages discusses the close resemblances between Australian Koori and Dravidian languages.
Jonathan Harrington (b.1958), Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney in his research article The Phonetics and Phonology of Australian Aboriginal languages published two table-charts on the vowels and consonants of Australian Aboriginal languages, assigning International Phonetic Association (IPA) alphabets.
Punal K. Murugaiyan (2009) prepared a chart assigning Tamil alphabets to IPA alphabets. I used his chart in preparing the Tamil equivalents of Aboriginal vowels and consonants.
R. H. Mathews (1841-1918) in his The Wailwan Language in pages 171, 172 indicates the agglutinative nature of Wailawan language. I have added the possible Tamil equivalents.
The verbs have number, person, tense, and everyday mood. Like the pronouns, they have inclusive and exclusive endings to express the dual or the plural in the first person.
அடி = கும்மு = gumulli
நிகழ்காலம் ஆண்பால்
தன்மை = I hit = அடிக்கிறேன் = கும்முறான் = Gumurra-dhu
முன்னிலை You hit =அடிக்கிறாய் = கும்முறாய் = Gumurra-ndu
படர்க்கை = He hits = அடிக்கிறான் = கும்முறான் = Gumurra-lu
நிகழ்காலம் பலர்பால்
தன்மை We hit = அடிக்கிறோம் = கும்முறோம் = Gumurr
முன்னிலை You hit = அடிக்கிறீர்கள் = கும்முறீர்கள் = Gumurra-ndugal
படர்க்கை = They hit = அடிக்கிறார்கள் = கும்முறார்கள் = Gumurra-lugal
The past and future forms of verbs have endings that vary according to whether the action was of longer or shorter duration. These different endings stay the same for all persons, whether in the singular, dual or plural. By adding the necessary pronominal suffix, the verb acquires a special ending for each person and each number of all the tenses, as shown by the conjugation of the indicative present given above.
கடந்த காலம் ஒன்றன்பால், தன்மை
I hit this morning = அடித்தேன் = Gume ngurranyedhu
I hit yesterday = அடித்தனான் =Gume gumbirradhu
I hit long time ago = அடித்துள்ளேன் = Gume ngargambodhu
எதிர்காலம் ஒன்றன்பால் தன்மை
I will hit, straight away = அடித்திடுவேன் = Gumulla-galladhu
I will hit tomorrow = அடிப்பேன் = Gumulngurriagadhu
I will hit, soon = அடிக்கவுள்ளேன் = Gumullagawandugagadhu
R. M. W. Dixon (1980) discusses the wider affiliation of Australian languages to assert that the Dravidian suggestion deserves to be taken seriously in, The languages of Australia (p.236)
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day discusses the agglutinative nature of the Dravidian and Tasmanian languages and goes on to say that fishermen of the Coramendal coast will easily pick up words spoken by Tasmanian aboriginals (p.120)
There are many such notices on linguistic and other similarities. Padma Subramaniam, the dancer from Tamil Nadu, R. Mathivanan, P. Ramanathan, Sutha Seshaiyan, researchers in Tamilnadu and Mathahlai Somu, writer from Australia have touched upon this subject in the course of their treatises on Tamil ancestry.
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day discussing the social face of love among aboriginals of Australia brings out a Dravidian connection (p.161).
Per Hage (2001) uses linguistic evidence to support her views on The Evolution of Dravidian Kinship Systems in Oceania, including the aboriginals of Australia. She quotes N. J. Allen extensively, using Allen’s world historical theory of kinship where the humanity began with a tetradic-Dravidian system.
Dravidian system of kinship encourages cross-cousin marriages. The brother of the mother is given priority status in family ceremonies.
Robert Lawler (1991) in his Voices of the First Day points to the physical resemblance of the Dravidians to the aboriginals of Australia indicating a racial similarity, goes on to clarify as to why modern anthropologists conveniently disregard it (p.121).
Spencer Wells (1969) in his Deep Ancestry describes how Ramasamy Pitchappan showed closer linkages using Y-chromosome markers (p.124). The Piraan Malai Kallar community near Madurai carries a piece of genetic trail as a direct genetic link to the Aboriginal community of Australia.
Josephine Flood (2006) discusses the biological angle in The Original Australians, Story of the Aboriginal People (p.185) quoting the work of Alan Redd and Mark Stoneking. These two geneticists studied Mitochondrion Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid from present day aboriginals to find that they are ten times closer to Indians than to New Guineans. They estimated that the time of separation of Australian Aboriginals from southern Indians was at 3390 years with 95% certainty. Josephine also quotes the study of geneticists Pellekaan linking southern Indians with Australian Aboriginals.
Migrants from South India settled in Australia 4,000 years before Captain Cook's arrival (and they took their dingos with them) Australia was settled by a wave of immigrants from South India little more than 4,000 years ago, a genetic study shows.
The finding overturns the view that the continent was isolated from the time it was first colonised about 45,000-50,000 years ago, until Europeans discovered Australia in the eighteenth century.
DNA evidence suggests that rather than complete most of the journey over several generations by foot, the Tamil South Indian migrants came over by boat. By the time the Tamil South Indian settlers reached Australia the ancient land bridge was under water so they sailed.
Australia’s first human colonisation was the culmination of the long walk out of Africa by the human species. Humans are believed to have left Africa, via the Arabian coast and through South India before reaching Indonesia and New Guinea and finally over an ancient land bridge to Australia. Following their arrival there was, according to ‘the prevailing view’, little if any contact between Australia’s Aboriginal inhabitants and the rest of the world.
Analysis of DNA samples from Aboriginal people living in the Northern Territories of Australia today shows that they have up to 11 per cent of their genetic heritage is Tamil South Indian. The new settlers came from South India and the lack of their DNA in other parts of Asia suggests they sailed directly across the Indian Ocean rather than work their way towards Australia by foot.
Scientists found strong evidence of a wave of settlers from South India reaching Australia 141 generations ago. Aboriginals who took part in the study were found to have up to 11 per cent of their DNA from Tamil South Indian descent.
Intriguingly, their arrival corresponds to evidence in the archaeological record that shows dingos reached Australia about the same time, suggesting they may have been transported by boat by the human settlers.
Dr Irina Pugach, of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, said the international research team calculated that the Tamil South Indian DNA reached the Aboriginal population 141 generations ago. Assuming that each generation is separated on average by 30 years the geneticists were able to conclude that the Tamil South Indian population arrived on in Australia 4230 years ago.
‘Interestingly this date also coincides with many changes in the archaeological record of Australia, which include a sudden change in plant processing and stone tool technologies, with microliths appearing for the first time, and the first appearance of the dingo in the fossil record,’ she said.
‘Since we detect inflow of genes from South India into Australia at around the same time, it is likely that these changes were related to this migration.’
Mark Stoneking, a geneticist at the Max Planck Institute, led the study and told Nature magazine: ‘Australia is thought to represent one of the earliest migrations for humans after they left Africa, but it seemed pretty isolated after that.’
DNA from 344 people was analysed for the study, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Samples were taken from people in Papua New Guinea, South East Asia, China, the US and Australia’s Northern Territory.
The dingo is thought to have reached Australia with humans about 4,230 years ago.
In almost all these treatises, authors have taken pains to show diagrammatically the migration of humans between southern India and Australia.
These diagrams conceptually converge with the Tamil thought process - from Simon Casie Chetty through Na. Si. Kanthaia Pillai to Maraimalai Adikal, Neelakanta Sastri and K. K.Pillai on the once prosperous Tamilian land mass of Kumari Kandam, otherwise known as Lemuria. These and many other Tamil scholars have sourced from linguistic and literary master pieces of the Sangam and post Sangam era to write and discuss about this supposedly disappeared land mass.
Political process
1926 David Unaipon called for increased Indigenous autonomy and representation
1927 Fred Maynard called for equality, equal citizenship rights and control of indigenous affairs
1933 Joe Anderson, the great King of Burraga, chief of the Thurawal tribes urged for representation in the Federal Parliament.
1937 William Cooper petitioned for representation in Parliament.
1946 Doug Nicholls did the same.
1963 Yirrkala Bark asked the government to consult Yolngu people before making decisions about their land and lives.
1967 Referendum, when a majority of Australians voted to amend the Constitution to recognize Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islander peoples as part of the Australian Nation.
1988 Galarrwuy Yunipingu presented the Barunga Statement to the Prime Minister, calling for a treaty to recognize the rights of the Indigenous people and their rights to self-determination and self-management.
1992 Mabo vs Queensland High Court recognized native title lands.
2008 Apology to the Stolen Generation by Kevin Rudd. Galarrwuy Yunipingu, Dilak of Yolngu asked Kevin Rudd to constitutionally recognize Indigenous rights.
So far only 4 aboriginals reached the Federal Parliament as members
Ken Wyatt from WA
Senator Neville Bonner Queensland
Senator Aden Ridgeway NSW
Senator Nova Peris NT
1 comment:
மகிழ்ச்சி.பல நூற்றாண்டுகள் முன் நடந்தவைகள் அறிந்ததில் சந்தோசம் ..வரும் கால சந்ததியினரும் இதை அறியவேண்டும்.. ஒரே ஒரு சந்தேகம்....திராவிடன்...யார் தென் இந்தியகளா..தமிழரா
Post a Comment