sign in sign up
<<
Home , Brahmin Tamil, Devaneya Pavanar, Iyer, Subramania Bharati, Tamil language, Tamil Renaissance

CHAPTER 8 Coining Words and Politics in Late Colonial Tamilnadu

Forming words with roots will certainly ruin the beauty and growth of the and disfigure it; and is sure to inflame communal hatred. —E. M. Subramania to Government of Madras, Memorandum, 5 September 1941. Though a common terminology may be possible in Northern where Hindustani and Sanskrit have mingled together very much and local lan- guages have been greatly modified by them, such a terminology would be unsuited to the Tamil area where have preserved the purity of their language. Words coined must have Tamil roots and to make them intelligible to the Tamils. —Memorandum submitted by the Committee of Educationists to the Government of Madras, 22 August 1941. Some months ago, there raged in the academic world, a controversy regard- ing the coining of technical terms. While some said that there should be no bar on borrowing terms from other to express new scientific disciplines, others argued that only pure Tamil terms should be used.... [This] has raged since the beginnings of the Tamil language. But, in earlier days, it was not conducted by opposite camps; there were no acrimonious polemics; there was nobody to say 'Our language is ruined by the admix- ture of other languages; we should have a Protection Brigade to safeguard our language' and so on. —S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, Sorkalai Virundu, Madras, 1956, p. 31 (originally published in , 10 May 1947).

Drawing on Raymond Williams' formulation in his classic Key- words, that 'important social and historical processes occur within language',1 this chapter seeks to explore the cultural politics 144 In Those Days There Was tio Coffee Coining Words 145 surrounding the coining of technical and scientific terms for Bharati's views are typical of the nationalist perspective, which pedagogic purposes in late colonial Tamilnadu. But, while Williams was shared by a wide range of intellectuals. Fed on a takes up a cluster of words, I will focus on the conscious struggle staple diet of Orientalist scholarship, the newly emerging English- between two broadly defined ideological schools to establish their educated Brahmin intellectuals sought to reconstitute the own set of principles for the very coining of technical terms. inferiorisanon of Tamil vis-a-vis Sanskrit.4 In the specific context In studying the debates surrounding the coining of technical of Tamilnadu, this attitude was reinforced by the activities of the terms in late colonial Tamilnadu and delineating the counter- Theosophical Society. For instance, V. Krishnaswamy , a promi- hegemonic efforts of Tamil scholars to displace Sanskrit and other nent Congress leader of the pre-Swadeshi era, claimed that 'San- foreign languages in this arena, I will try to demonstrate how well- skrit is the parent of all including Tamil; for much entrenched views that favoured the use of Sanskrit and/or English that is claimed in Tamil as original is indebted to conceptions technical terms were challenged by a large number of Tamil schol- which are entirely to be found in the field of Sanskrit,'5 while P.S. ars, leading to a consensus by the 1940s about the existence Sivaswamy Iyer saw Sanskrit 'as the language which enshrines the of a common Tamil past that was rich and independent (especially highest ideas of Indo-.. .'.6 The flip side of this glorification of Sanskrit) and, as a direct result, to demands that the develop- of Sanskrit was the demotion of Tamil. Nambi Arooran has shown ment of the Tamil language on modern lines be free of all foreign how, in the , Tamil was marginalised as a influence. These processes took place in the context of the non- '' while Sanskrit was accorded the status of a classical Brahmin movement which was giving political to such as- language.7 It has also been argued that the hegemonic location of pirations. The question, then, was not just about coining words but the Brahmin in civil society was rooted in the privileging of San- also about the fundamental definition of Tamil identity. skrit and the accompanying contempt for Tamil.8 Given this per- With the gradual expansion of Western under colo- spective on Sanskrit and Tamil, and the nationalist compulsion to nial aegis, the need to produce standard textbooks based on com- imagine a united and homogeneous Indian nation, it was stressed monly understood terminology in indigenous languages was keenly that Sanskrit should be the root (both etymologically and figura- felt. In early Tamil textbooks, there was an excessive reliance on tively) of all new word coinage. English terms, many of them being little more than awkward This construction of an Indian/Tamil past did not go unchal- transliterations into Tamil. Not surprisingly, the nationalist intel- lenged. As we have seen in earlier chapters, by the late nineteenth lectuals were the first to react to this situation. C. Rajagopalachari, century, a group of non- scholars from the elite the prominent nationalist, along with a friend, started in 1917 the , like P. Sundaram Pillai, V. Kanakasabhai and J.M. Journal of the Tamil Scientific Terms Society.2 Predictably enough, the Nallasami Pillai, drawing on the philological works of 'Tamil' technical terms coined in the journal were almost exclu- Caldwell, M. Winslow and G.U. Pope, counterposed their con- sively drawn from Sanskrit. was critical of the struction of history, effectively displacing Sanskrit and journal being published in English but was in broad agreement with Tamil and , and conjuring up a vision of a glorious with its aim of drawing technical terms from Sanskrit: and independent Tamil past. The Nagari Pracharini Sabha of is producing a huge glossary Thus it should come as no surprise that this very group of by translating European technical terms into simple Sanskrit. Our scholars came to contest word coinage based on Sanskrit roots. By vernacular languages may, to the best possible and desirable extent, 1920, P.N. Appuswamy, the doyen of popular science writing in draw from these terms. All European languages, likewise, draw from Tamil, and the editor of Tamilar Nesan (which contributed not a Greek and Latin. If we do the same [adopting from Sanskrit] there will little to Tamil technical terminology) had identified three streams be uniform terminology in our .3 in this regard: 146 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 147

Some stress that technical terms should be based on pure Tamil root- referred to the question of coining Tamil technical terms and ex- words. Some are of the view that they may be drawn from the fraternal pressed the opinion that no attempt should be made to replace language, Sanskrit. While yet others say, why waste our efforts, let us already existing technical terms (i.e., even if they were of non- adopt in toto the English terms used all over the world. It is time we Tamil origin). In his view, the terms were to be simple and easy decided this [issue].9 to understand: it mattered little whether they were of pure Tamil But the issue was not be settled so easily. It took decades to resolve origin or not. But then, he expressed the caveat that the borrowed the question, and well over a decade passed before it was even terms should be in keeping with Tamil conventions regarding seriously, if acrimoniously, debated. phonology.13 Swaminatha Iyer's views did not satisfy Sanskrit die- The first round of the debate started around the organisation hards who felt that his views were not clear-cut and that he had of the Tamil Anbar Mahanadu (The Tamil Enthusiasts' Confer- tried to accommodate the ideas of the pure Tamil champions.14 The ence) in Madras in December 1933. From the beginning, the con- hard-hitting speech of Raja Sir Annamalai Chettiar,15 attacking ference was plagued by controversy. It was generally perceived 'pedants' who insisted on coining pure Tamil terms at the expense that the conference was the handiwork of Brahmin scholars to of simplicity and easy comprehensibility more accurately reflected push through their own programme of Tamil development. The the general tenor of the conference.16 monthly Bharati queried why some of the major non-Brahmin Some activists of the Self-Respect Movement seem to have Tamil scholars such as , Somasundara Bharati, raised questions and caused a commotion during the conference.17 Pandithamani Kathiresan Chettiar, V.O. Pillai, K. However, many resolutions were passed emphasising the need for Subramania Pillai, TV. Umamaheswaran Pillai, Sachidanandam education through the medium of Tamil, the preparation of an Pillai, and N.M. Venkatasami Nattar were not invited to the con- encyclopaedia in Tamil, and assigning classical status to Tamil in ference. It further stressed that issues of caste, religion and politics the Universities.18 But two resolutions, one urging the use of terms should not be brought into common issues like language and already in currency when suitable Tamil terms could not be coined, literature.10 If this was the criticism of non-partisan intellectuals, and another recommending the pruning of the Tamil alphabet of the Self-Respect Movement was more open and vehement in its some supposedly redundant letters and incorporating new ones attack. An editorial in the Kudi Arasu titled 'Prohita Atchiyin to spell foreign sounds stirred a hornet's nest. Within a fortnight Pithalattangal' (The Skulduggery of Priestly Rule) expressed the of the Tamil Enthusiasts' Conference, a group of Vellalar Tamil view that the conference was little more than a conspiracy by the scholars led by M.V. Nellaiyappa Pillai and E.M. Subramania Pillai 'priestly class' to ensure their control over the Tamil language.11 gathered at the Vasantha Mandapam, , to condemn the The Tamil Enthusiasts' Conference opened with much fanfare above-mentioned resolutions. They urged that suitable terms could on 23 December 1933 at Pachaiyappa's College, Madras. Leading be culled from the ancient Tamil classics, and new ones coined nationalist and literary personalities like V.S. Srinivasa Sastri, from Tamil root-words.19 Interestingly, even when this meeting S. Satyamurty, P. Varadarajulu Naidu, Thiru. Vi. Kalyanasundara adopted the other non-controversial resolutions passed at the Tamil Mudaliar, P.S. Kumaraswamy Raja, T.K. Chidambaranatha Enthusiasts' Conference, the Sanskrit words in the original reso- Mudaliar, 'Sangu' Subramaniam, Va. Ra., Kalki Krishnamurty, lutions were placed in parentheses, and substituted with pure S. Ambujam Ammal, Sister Balammal, Vai. Mu. Kothainayaki Tamil equivalents.20 The meeting also resolved to hold a Tamil Ammal and others participated. Messages sent by , Presidency Conference some months later. C.P. Ramaswamy Iyer and P.S. Sivaswamy Iyer were read out.12 The proposed conference stimulated much debate, with various The conference was presided over by the doyen of Tamil schol- views being expressed about the coining of Tamil technical terms.21 ars, U.V. Swaminatha Iyer. In his keynote address inter alia, he In fact, the Secretary of the conference, E.M. Subramania Pillai,22 148 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 149 and the moving spirit behind the whole project of coining technical V.P. Subramania Mudaliar, A. Srinivasaraghavan, K.P. Santosham, terms in Tamil, had to issue a statement clarifying the organisers' Sami Velayutham Pillai, R.P. Sethu Pillai, and Arul Thangaiah. position: T.P. Meenakshisundaram Pillai (a much-respected scholar and nationalist) and T.N. Seshachalam, editor of the literary journal Various views are being expressed by some people about the Madras Kalanilayam, were also part of the conferences.29 The committees Presidency Tamil Conference to be held shortly in Tirunelveli. Some also included a number of Brahmins, as is evident from their caste members of the Tamil Enthusiasts' Conference held last December in surnames.30 This broad spectrum of scholars from diverse groups Madras say this is a rival conference. The Self-Respect group dubs this and factions shows how the cause originally espoused by Vellalar 23 as a Vellalar conference. ... We have for a long time thought of ways scholars had begun to be accepted by a wider scholarly commu- to develop the Tamil language.... In the public meeting held on nity.31 The champions of Tamil (versus Sanskrit) had won the first 7 January 1934 the name ' Tamil Conference' was round when Kalaichorkal, the volume on technical terms, got a accepted unanimously after much deliberation. We invite all Tamil foreword from C. Rajagopalachari, who appreciated the work in people and enthusiasts irrespective of caste and religion to take part in the conference. There is space for even divergent political parties. broad terms, and was also subsequently recommended by the Therefore there will be no resolutions regarding caste, religion or Government of Madras to be distributed to all the secondary 32 politics. The aim of the organisers of this conference is to maintain the schools at government expense. purity of Tamil. Only resolutions which put forth the development of But this victory, if indeed it was one, was marked by ambiva- Tamil and ensure unity and love, without detriment to its purity and lence. Spurred by the initial success, E.M. Subramania Pillai wrote 24 richness will be taken up. to Rajaji, then the Premier of the Madras Presidency, asking the government to adopt the terms prepared by the Sangam in all The conference was finally held in June 1934, out of which was schools, after some revision in the light of suggestions by people born the Magana Tamilar Sangam (Madras Presidency actually engaged in teaching.33 Rajaji had his own views on the Tamil Sangam), whose primary function turned out to be that of question of coining technical terms—he was categorically against 25 coining technical terms in Tamil. From 1934, a series of seminars adopting English terms but believed '... it is wrong to create con- 26 for the specific purpose of coining terms was organised. A journal fusion in the task of compiling ancient technical terms and coining called Tamil Thai was also published in pursuance of this objective. new terms by aligning with the Pure Tamil Movement. One should Special committees were formed for disciplines like Mathematics, not bear an unreasonable hatred for Sanskrit words that tend to Physics, Chemistry, Botany, Zoology, Physiology, Geography and mix [with Tamil] naturally'34—and therefore quite understand- 27 Agriculture. Out of the efforts of these committees and confer- ably, was rather unwilling to go all the way with E.M. Subramania ences, the Sangam published in 1938 a volume called Kalaichorkal Pillai. He commented in the Government Order: 'Perhaps we may (Technical Terms). keep aloof for the time being.'35 This ambivalence on the part of By this time such efforts at coining technical terms had been the Government of Madras was what led to the next round of rewarded with some success. A wide range of intellectuals and conflict, to which we now turn. Tamil scholars, never identified with either the non-Brahmin move- In June 1940, the Government of Madras, having 'recognized ment or the Vellalar Tamil scholars, were being drawn towards the the importance of providing for a more extended use of the Sangam's endeavours. For instance, the 1936 Conference was pre- tongue in teaching non-language subjects in high schools' and the sided over by the widely respected Swami Vipulanandar (of the 28 necessity for suitable textbooks for this purpose, felt the need for Ramakrishna Mission, Batticoloa). The various committees con- 'a proper and commonly accepted vocabulary of scientific and sisted of scholars like Vipulanandar, S.G. Manavala Ramanujam, technical terms'. In pursuance of this objective, it appointed a 150 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 151 committee headed by V.S. Srinivasa Sastri to settle the 'general the approval of the purist who stands up for the niceties of linguistic principles on which a uniform system of standardized technical correctitude and that of the chauvinist who abhors borrowing from foreign sources.39 and scientific terms' could be introduced, and further proposed sub-committees for each language after such general principles Apart from these prejudices, which dubbed the perspective of were laid down. The main terms of reference were: (a) the extent the pro-Tamil scholars as chauvinist, Srinivasa Sastri also showed to which equivalents of foreign technical terms in South Indian undue interest in the choice of the committee. He insisted on two languages then in use were acceptable for educational purposes; teachers each from colleges and high schools and one representa- (b) the desirability of retaining the use of English terms when there tive each from the and Karanthai , delib- were no accepted equivalents in the South Indian languages; and erately excluding the Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam. Lastly, he (c) whether, as an alternative, it was necessary to draw up new and strongly recommended the inclusion of S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, who 40 standardised lists of equivalents of certain foreign technical terms was generally perceived to be anti-Tamil. for all the South Indian languages.36 The Madras Presidency Tamil The Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam issued a series of pam- Sangam received with shock the news of the constitution of that phlets condemning the government's move. These pamphlets committee. Its secretary, E.M. Subramania Pillai immediately shot explained why technical terms should be coined only in Tamil and 41 off a letter to the government: refuted the arguments of those who stood for loan words. An- other pamphlet 'exposed' the definite Sanskrit leanings of at least It is... surprising to find that the Government... should now think it six committee members, and deplored the failure to appoint even desirable to form a new committee with very poor representation of a single pro-Tamil scholar to the committee, and went on to sug- Tamilians and no representation of the Tamil Sangam that has laboured gest a dozen widely-respected Tamil scholars who were better so much in the field till now.... The Tamilians... view the constitution 42 of the Committee and the terms of reference with considerable distrust qualified for the task than the existing committee. It argued that and alarm and feel that their language and culture that has withstood frequent changes in terminology would only end up creating the onslaughts of several centuries and can even now shine indepen- confusion, and demonstrated, by listing earlier Sanskrit-based dent of foreign help should have come to be thus smothered... in the word-coinage, that they were awkward and unsuitable for Tamil.43 guise of uniform scientific terminology.37 Other Tamil scholars expressed similar views.44 Unmindful of these protests, the Sastri committee went about E.M. Subramania Pillai called for the withdrawal of the terms its business quickly and submitted its recommendations within of reference, the dissolution of the committee, and the constitution three months of its constitution. The Madras Presidency Tamil of separate language committees for work on the lines suggested Sangam complained that it felt 'strange that the Technical Terms by the Sangam. He also threatened to 'agitate both in the platform Committee [had]... concluded its labours in so short a time and and through the press,' if his demands were not met.38 The fears in haste, considering the importance of the work entrusted to it'.45 of Subramania Pillai and the Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam A government official jotted the following note on the file, 'As was were not unfounded. The chairman, V.S. Srinivasa Sastri, had done with previous representations from the Sangam, the present definite views on the subject of coining technical terms. By his own 46 admission, he was far from being proficient in Tamil, and had a representation may also...be ignored.' clear bias for Sanskrit. As he wrote to the Secretary of the Educa- The Sastri Committee's report confirmed the worst fears of the tion Department: pro-Tamil scholars. It made the following recommendations: 1. The equivalents of foreign technical terms in the South Indian Uniformity of phraseology is... a desideratum... [but] cannot wait for languages now in use in the lower secondary classes have mostly the ideal system of nomenclature which shall [have] at the same time established themselves and are acceptable. 152 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 153

2. It is necessary to draw up a standardised list of technical terms, in the midst of a Tamil sentence. English terms could, further, not common to all South Indian languages, for conceptual or abstract be written or spelt in the mother tongues properly, would undergo names and ideas. changes in pronunciation which would make them even 3. The remaining technical terms... will be bodily taken from English unrecognisable and ridiculous, and would be a dead weight in the and transliterated into the South Indian scripts accompanied wher- language, quite incapable of generating further derivatives, espe- ever necessary, by the original words in English script enclosed cially verb forms. It followed that the recommendations would 47 within brackets. hamper the spread of scientific knowledge among the masses. These recommendations were met with a further series of pam- Finally, the recommendations were short-sighted, as Indian lan- phlets and articles in scholarly journals and periodicals, wherein guages would soon displace English as the and impractical as every attempt at uniformity in various lan- it was emphasised how Tamil belonged to an entirely different 51 family of languages, that is, the Dravidian that was non-Sanskritic guages was only doomed to failure. in origin, and how it was capable of coining terms based on its own A committee headed by T.S. Pillai, A. Muthaiah Pillai root-words. Evidence was rallied for this purpose from the philo- and Arul Thangaiah submitted a similar memorandum to the 52 logical works of Max Miiller, , and Suniti Kumar government. These memoranda were followed by a massive Chatterjee.48 meeting held at Gokhale Hall, Madras, on 31 August 1941. Sir The memorandum sent by the Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam, Mohammed Usman, Vice-Chancellor of the Madras University, dated 25 November 1940 contains the most elaborate, cogent and presided over the meeting. As noted, 'leaders well-argued case for the pro-Tamil position.49 The Modern Review belonging to all shades of political opinion and communities,' like described it as Very informative and well-argued'.50 First, the S. Muthaiah Mudaliar, Dr T.S. Thirumurty Iyer, Arul Thangaiah, T.P. Meenakshisundaram Pillai and Kunjitham Gurusamy, ad- memorandum argued that the 'Committee of Experts' was quite 53 unrepresentative, packed with men having 'a special and definite dressed the meeting. The meeting condemned the recommenda- leaning towards English and Sanskrit terms', that it was meagre, tions of the Sastri Committee, and underscored the danger of as just fifteen men could not seal the fate of so many languages, adopting foreign words which would spell disaster for Tamil. and quite incompetent as the members' knowledge of Tamil and Resolutions were passed unanimously stating that common scien- Dravidian philology was 'precious little'. Second, the memoran- tific terminology applicable to the whole of India, which com- dum noted that the terms of reference were narrow (limited to prised a variety of languages and cultures, was impracticable and educational purposes), ambiguous (as the phrase 'all the South unnecessary, and that suitable Tamil equivalents for scientific terms Indian languages' could mean the languages taken individually or could be found in almost all cases or as far as possible. S. Muthaiah together), and faulty. Finally, the memorandum argued that the Mudaliar warned that the government would face an agitation of the magnitude of the anti- agitation of 1937-39 that had recommendations themselves were quite arbitrary as no reason 54 was given for choosing Sanskrit roots in some cases and English brought the Congress ministry to a standstill. In the Sunday terms in others; they were inconsistent, for while and Observer Balasubramania Mudaliar also held out a similar threat. Persian roots were recommended for , Dravidian was not T.P. Meenakshisundaram Pillai expressed the hope that if Rajaji similarly recommended for the . The recom- had not been in prison, he would have fully supported the cause. He added that interpolated Sanskrit and English words were only mendations were moreover unscientific. While direct borrowing 55 was preferable to indirect borrowing through a dead language 'millstones around the neck'. (Sanskrit), such borrowing was unsuitable and injurious, as the Despite the all-round support that the cause of coining technical mechanical transliteration of English terms would sound hideous terms in Tamil had won, there was still a mood of despondency 154 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 155 in the pro-Tamil camp, as the government was getting increasingly 60 stubborn. E.M. Subramania Pillai's personal communication of Pillai's example of adopting Sanskrit terms should be followed. that time reveals this mood: "The government has succumbed to The appeal to Sundaram Pillai's authority is ironic, as he was the conspiracy of the Sanskrit-Brahmins.... Our resolutions have generally perceived to be the doyen of the Tamil 'renaissance' in not been heeded. Perhaps, if we meet the government in person the late nineteenth century. (His invocation to Mother Tamil was and explain to it the conspiracy of Sanskrit Brahmins there might adopted as the Tamil anthem after the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam be a change [in its attitude]....'56 He was no less unhappy with took over as the state government in Tamilnadu in the late 1960s). non-Brahmin leaders. In an earlier letter to V. Subbiah Pillai in Ramaswamy Gounder exposed the partisanship behind this argu- 1934, he had written: ment and declared it to be part of a larger diabolical plan of the Brahmins and their stooges to destroy Tamil. He quoted from Brahmins have roped in some of us to destroy our non-Brahmin Sundaram Pillai's writings to show that not only had he fully association, and have even met with three-fourths success. This is due subscribed to the theory of the Dravidian family of languages but to the selfishness of our leaders. The non-Brahmin ministry runs had also condemned Sanskrit as a dead language.61 Ramaswamy the government. But the minister has scaled down the salary of ver- Gounder went on to reproduce a personal exchange of words with nacular language teachers, much to the detriment of the mother Vaiyapuri Pillai during the course of a Technical Terms Committee tongues Unless our leaders mend their ways, realise the truth meeting and detailed his pro-Sanskrit views and his refusal to see and work for the commonweal, can the conspiracy of our enemies reason.62 be foiled?57 Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, who had single-handedly radicalised Despite this, the debate continued with Tamil scholars represent- the non-Brahmin movement from the late 1920s onwards, entered ing a wide spectrum campaigning for coining technical terms in this debate. While emphasising the need for simplicity and easy Tamil and criticising the Sastri Committee's recommendations, comprehensibility when coining technical terms, he condemned especially the one concerning borrowing from Sanskrit.58 In this the terms coined by the Technical Terms Committee and praised debate no one was spared. At the Provincial Tamil Music Confer- the efforts of the Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam. He observed ence and Tamil Pandits' Conference held in Tiruchi in December that the terms coined by the latter were better and explained that 1941 under the Presidentship of K. Ponniah Pillai, Professor of this was due to the fact that the Sangam, unlike the official commit- Music, University of Madras and S. Somasundara Bharati, the tee, had a real love for Tamil. He concluded: noted scholar and Professor of Tamil at Annamalai University, the following resolution was passed condemning'... very strongly the We can borrow words from any language which is in keeping with our dignity and self-respect, and which will instil a sense of indepen- action of U.V. Swaminatha Iyer in misrepresenting pure Sanskrit dence and rid us of our present debasement. It does not matter with phrases as Tamil idiom, in spite of holding all the highest titles in which language we are associated. But we should never have any Tamil and amassing enormous wealth through Tamil from truck with Sanskrit.63 Tamilians, and [urging] him to admit his error'.59 Another resolu- tion called for the immediate dissolution of the Sastri Committee. The struggle, then, pertained not only to certain aspects of lan- In yet another controversy, A. Ramaswamy Gounder, Principal guage, but was closely tied to the forging of a new identity based of Salem College and the only dissenting member of the Sastri largely on language. Periyar, as was his wont, had once again Committee, took issue with comments on P. Sundaram Pillai made pithily and forcefully highlighted the issues at stake. by S. Vaiyapuri Pillai in an attacking 'sectarian' perspec- In 1946, the Congress formed the interim government in tives in regard to coining technical terms and arguing that Sundaram Madras. This was in a sense a turning point and led to the final round of the controversy, crowning the efforts of the pro-Tamil 156 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 157 school with success. Under the interim ministry, T.S. Avinashilingam The sub-committee also added two additional categories, over- Chettiar took over the education portfolio of the Government of riding the earlier recommendations: {a) adopting Tamil words Madras. Though a Congressman, he was generally perceived to be which had already been in common use in high school classes, and pro-Tamil and his ministership raised the hopes of Tamil scholars. (£>) making straight translations from English into Tamil of the The Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam released pamphlets putting terms for qualities, processes, and so on. Finally, the Tamil sub- forward its case. In a pampVAet tatted 'Namathu Sarvgamum Tamil committee claimed 'that the lists now offered by the sub-commit- Magana Congressum'64 (Our Sangam and the Tamilnadu Con- tee represent a just and reasonable balance between the purely academic and educational ideals of the Technical Terms Commit- gress), E.M. Subramania PiUai recapitulated the various efforts of 67 the Sangam and the cooperation extended to it by the earlier tee and the insistent claims of linguistic patriotism'. What had Congress ministry. He pleaded that technical terms should be once been dubbed chauvinism was now being validated, if only coined only in good Tamil, and that the mother tongue should be indirectly, as patriotism. the medium of instruction in all schools and colleges. Avinashilingam Chettiar showed much enthusiasm and reacted positively. He went about the task of overhauling the Standardisa- Conclusion tion of Technical and Scientific Terms Committee, which had more or less become defunct after the demise of its chairman V.S. Srinivasa The controversy around the coining of technical terms is one Sastri in April 1946. On his own initiative, Avinashilingam Chettiar example of how larger political issues regarding power, represen- appointed T.S. Thirumurty Iyer (who had participated in many of tation and identity were fought out in and through issues oi the meetings organised to condemn the Sastri Committee's recom- language. As part of a larger process of identity formation amongst mendations) as the chairman of the committee. He further sug- the Tamils, Brahmin hegemony in a range of cultural fields was gested the following members for the Tamil sub-committee: Swami being contested. The rediscovery of the ancient Tamil classics and Vipulanandar, R.P. Sethu Pillai, S. Vaiyapuri PiUai, G. Subramania the formulation of a theory of the Dravidian family of languages Pillai and A. Chidambaranathan Chettiar.65 Except for Vaiyapuri in the second half of the nineteenth century provided the intellec- Pillai, the others, though representing diverse political camps and tual ammunition for this contestation and the creation of a new factions, were all part of the emerging hegemonic formation in the Tamil identity. Earlier histories of Tamil-Sanskrit contestation were world of Tamil scholarship. But, in a sense, this government sanc- recast and reinterpreted in a new light. tion was only a fart accompli. The committee had by then submitted Sanskrit was seen to have done great harm to the natural growth its draft report, which stands testimony to the victory of the Tamil of the Tamil language, suppressed it and relegated it to an inferior scholars. The Tamil sub-committee openly acknowledged that not status. Further, the contamination of Tamil through foreign influ- only were a very large number of Tamil technical terms drawn ences was also seen to have divorced Tamil from the people. To from the Kalaichorkal published by the Madras Presidency Tamil redeem the self-image of the Tamil language and the Tamil people, Sangam but also that many fruitful suggestions for the formation it was seen as essential to counter the high status accorded to of new words weTe drawn from it. Then it added: Sanskrit. The counter-hegemonic efforts of Tamil scholars started late in the nineteenth century. With the progressive study of the The sub-committee felt that a strict and literal conformity with the Tamil classics, involving meticulous research and much winter- recommendations of the Technical Terms [Sastrij Committee was in- pretation, a more egalitarian conception of the Tamil past and, expedient, as the adoption of a very large number of English words by implication, a more democratic Tamil present were being and words of Sanskrit origin would run counter to the current ten- forged. This view of the Tamil past and present was to be shared dency of Tamil scholarship....66 Coining Words 159 158 In Those Days There Was No Coffee

2. Bhamti Katturaigal, Vol. 3, Kalaigal, Madras, n.d., p. 110. These articles by a growing number of Tamil scholars across a wide spectrum. were originally written in the nationalist Tamil daily Swadesamitran This had little to do directly with the organised non-Brahmin during the period 1916-19. For a critical analysis of Bharati's views movement, nor was it restricted to the Vellalar scholars, who had on language modernisation, see my 'Subramania Bharati and the done much initially to formulate the Dravidian ideology for Modernisation of Tamil', South Indian Studies, 1, January 1996. the genesis of the non-Brahmin movement. Soon a much wider 3. Ibid., p. 110. For an argument in favour of retaining English representation of the world of Tamil scholarship was involved. terms, see A.V. Subramania Iyer, Tharkala Tamil llakkiyam, Madras, During the course of this emerging consensus regarding the Tamil 1985 (reprint of second revised edition published in 1942), pp. 56- past and the nature of the Tamil language, even scholars of the 58. stature of U.V. Swaminatha Iyer and S. Vaiyapuri Pillai were not 4. See M.S.S. Pandian, 'Notes on the Transformation of "Dravidian" spared. Ideology, Tamilnadu, c. 1900-40/ Social Scientist, Nos 252-53, May- In 1946, when the Chennai Tamilarignar Kazhagam recom- June 1994. mended the names of T.P. Meenakshisundaram Pillai, A. 5. Indian Review, April 1910 and January 1911. Quoted in Pandian, Ramaswamy Gounder, , R.P. Sethu Pillai, p. 3. 6. New India, 19 November 1914. Quoted in Pandian, p. 3. Sami Velayudam Pillai, M.S. Sabesa Iyer, A. Chidambaranathan 7. Nambi Arooran, and Dravidian Nationalism, 1905-44, Chettiar and others for appointment to the Technical Terms Madurai, 1980. Committee, it was clear that sectarian boundaries had been tran- 8. Pandian, 'Notes'. scended and a certain basic consensus had emerged. The Tamil 9. Tamilar Nesan, 4(6), Purattasi, Routhri (). sub-committee's acceptance of the principles behind the coining 10. Bharati, 5(6), September-October 1933. of technical terms adopted by the Madras Presidency Tamil 11. Kudi Arasu, 12 September 1937. Sangam signalled the final victory for the pro-Tamil camp. The 12. See the report of the proceedings in Manikkodi, 24 December 1933. controversy also brings to the forefront the problematic relation- 13. The text of U.V. Swaminatha Iyer's inaugural address was published ship between the world of Tamil scholars/scholarship and the in ManModi, 24 December 1933. non-Brahmin/. 14. See the article by 'Oru Anbar' ('An Enthusiast'), Manikkodi, 31 Chapter 6 has argued against a one-to-one reduction of Vellalar/ December 1933. Saivite elite to the non-Brahmin movement. There were much 15. Annamalai Chettiar, however, later in his life patronised the pro- deeper cultural undercurrents which fed into the Dravidian Tamil scholars through his Annamalai University, which was con- movement and gave it intellectual succour while at the same ceived as a university for Tamil. In the early 1940s he was the moving time drawing political support for its cause. The Dravidian spirit behind the Tamil Isai (music) movement. movement is best seen as an overtly political manifestation of 16. For the text of Annamalai Chettiar's speech, see ibid., 24 December 1933. 'Oru Anbar' welcomed this speech and described it as 'clear- more deep-seated contradictions in Tamil society, which sharp- cut'. Ibid., 31 December 1933. ened early in the twentieth century against the background of 17. Manikkodi, 31 December 1933. colonial rule. 18. For the text of the resolutions, see Manikkodi, 24 December 1933. 19. Kumaran, 25 January 1934. 20. For example, 'moli' instead of 'bashai,' 'muthanmai' instead of Notes and References 'pirathanyam/ '' instead of 'mahanadu.' That these alterna- tives are the ones in usage even today in Tamilnadu proclaims the 1. Raymond Williams, Keywords, London, 1983, p. 22. Emphasis in success of the counter-hegemonic project of the pro-Tamil scholars. original. 21. See, for instance, the editorial in Kumaran, 14 March 1934. 160 In Those Days There Was No Coffee Coining Words 161

22. For details of his life and work, see the biography by his , E.S. 34. For Rajaji's views on this subject, see his Katturaigal, Karaikkudi, Muthusamy, Tamil Perumpulavar Ee. MM. Subramania Pillai, Madras, 1944, pp. 19ff. 1984, which also contains an account of his contribution to the project 35. Rajaji's note, 5 March 1939. GO No. 1051, Edn. & PH, 8 June 1940; of coining technical terms in Tamil and the controversies surround- also GO No. 2638, Edn. & PH, 15 November 1938. ing it (pp. 46-66). 36. GO No.1051, Edn. & PH, 8 June 1940. 23. For the ambivalent and tension-ridden relationship between the 37. GO No. 1319, Edn. & PH, 17 July 1940. Vellalar/Saivite elite and the Dravidian movement, see Chapter 7. 38. Ibid. For an extended Tamil version, see my Dravida Iyakkamum Vellalarum, 39. GO No. 1051, Edn. & PH, 8 June 1940. Madras, 1994. 40. Ibid. 24. Kumaran, 10 May 1934. For similar views about the need to maintain 41. See, for instance, the Tamil Arignar Kazhaga Arikkai (Association of the purity of Tamil, in the context of the approaching conference, see Tamil Scholars Pamphlet), No. 1. Kalaichollakkam Papers. the article by one V.P.S., ibid., 31 May 1934. 42. Ibid. 25. For criticism about the conference, especially the views of the Tamil 43. Ibid., no. 3, Kalaichollakkam Papers. scholar K. Subramania Pillai, see the article by Va. Ra., who was part 44. See, for instance, Tamil Pozhil, 16(3), Aani, Vikrama (Tamil calendar). of the earlier Tamil Enthusiasts' Conference, Manikkodi, 17 June 1934. 45. GO No. 1319, Edn. & PH, 17 July 1940. This article is reproduced in Va. Ra., Mazhaiyum Puyalum, Madras, 46. Ibid. 1951, pp. 40-44. 47. GO No. 1818, Edn. & PH, 18 September 1940. Emphasis added. 26. See the report/history of the Madras Presidency Tamil Sangam 48. See 'Tamil Arignar Kazhaga Arikkai', Nos 5-8, Kalaichollakkam Pa- published in 1946. Many of the pamphlets, memorials, memoranda pers; N.M. Venkatasami Nattar's article in Sentamil Selvi, August 1941 and press-clippings referred to in this essay are to be found in a and G. Devaneyan [Pavanar], ibid., August, 1941. separate file in the Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society's 49. See GO No. 1319, Edn. & PH, 17 July 1940. Archives (henceforth referred to as Kalaichollakkam Papers). I am 50. Modern Review, February 1941. grateful to Thiru R. Muthukumarasamy for access to these papers. 51. Ibid. 27. See E.M. Subramania Pillai's memorial to the Governor of Madras, 52. Ibid. dated 26 June 1940 which provides a full list of the committee 53. Clipping dated 1 September 1941. Also clippings from Hindu, 1 members. GO No. 1319, Education and Public Health (Edn. & PH), September 1941; Indian Express, 1 September 1941, Bharata Devi, 17 July 1940. (All GOs refer to the Government Orders of the Gov- September 1941, Kalaichollakkam Papers. Also see report in Sentamil ernment of Madras lodged in the Tamilnadu Archives, Madras). Selvi, August 1941. 28. See Siddhantam, October 1936, for the text of Swami Vipulanandar's 54. For an account of the agitation see Nambi Arooran, Tamil Renaissance speech. Also Navasakti, 2 October 1936. and Dravidian Nationalism. Also see Chapter 7 in this volume. 29. Navasakti, 21 August 1936. 55. Sentamil Selvi, August 1941. 30. GO No. 1319, Edn. & PH, 17 July 1940. 56. Letter to V. Subbaiah Pillai, dated 13 February 1941, E.M. Subramania 31. After the anti-Hindi agitation (1937-39), when numerous public Pillai Papers. meetings were conducted and countless propaganda materials 57. Letter to V. Subbaiah Pillai, dated 20 November 1934, E.M. Subramania were printed, ideas about the purity, glory and independence Pillai Papers. of Tamil language and culture percolated to the lower strata of 58. See, for instance, resolutions passed in the Ninth Madras Presidency society, and gradually became a part of the Tamil common sense. The Tamils' Conference, Tirunelveli in March 1943, Kumaran, 8 April exploration of this theme, however, is beyond the scope of this 1943; Resolutions of the Tenth Conference, Madras in December chapter. 1943, Tamil Pozhil, January 1944. 32. GO No. 2164, Edn., 12 September 1938. 59. U.V. Swaminatha Iyer Papers housed in the U.V. Swaminatha Iyer 33. GO No. 1051, Edn. & PH, 8 June 1940. Library, Madras. 162 In Those Days There Was No Coffee

60. Originally published in Vasantham, November 1943, reproduced in S. Vaiyapuri Pillai, Tamil Chudarmanigal, Madras, 1949. 61. 'Kalaichollakkam/ Tamil Pozhil, December 1943. 62. Ibid., February 1944. 63. Ve. Anaimuthu (ed.), Periyar Ee.Ve.Ra. Chinthanaigal, Vol. 2, Tiruchi, 1974, pp. 922-23. For similar views, see Viduthalai, 11 October 1946, quoted in E.S. Muthusamy, Tamil Perumpulavar Ee. Mu. Subramania Pillai, pp. 63-64. 64. Kalaichollakkam Papers. 65. GO No. 1222, Edn., 20 June 1946. 66. Ibid. 67. Ibid.