dear Mr Manjunath, i was mearely trying to point out to Mr Pompus whoever he is, that other dravidian speakers, especially Kannada speakers have had their great empires too and that Tamils are not the only empire builders.

Precisely, you were trying to trumpet Kannada achievements at the cost of that article which had a totally different angle. Your modifications made the article completely absurd. Your narrow minded hatred against Tamils has only succeeded in vandalizing the article.

Secondly, Kannada speakers did not start their litreary traditions "very late". they started their traditions "later". please correct your english and see the difference in wording.

Thank you for the correction. Probably, that was the only change you had to make and you succeeded in totally distorting the article.

This was because they were ruled by prakrit speakers in the north and hence Kannnada did not get the official recognition as early as tamil. This again has to do with geographical proximity. Please be aware of this. Just because the satahahanas encouraged Prakrit does not mean Kannada speakers did not speak Kannada, they just had to abide by officialdom given to Prakrit thats all, just like tulu spearkers todays have to abide by Kannada being the official language.

Totally irrelevent to the topic at hand. Anyway, the studies on Dravidian languages is still ongoing process. If the present studies are correct, the regions of Andhra and Karnataka spoke Dravidian language earlier than the region of Tamil Nadu. Probably, that makes Proto-Kannada older than Proto-Tamil. But that does not deny the fact that South India was referred as Dravida and not Karnata. The article was a mere compliation of the records that talked about Dravida and its association with South India.

I dont see this issue out of place. Just as Mention of early tamils kingdoms is valid, so is the mention of Kannada kigndoms to show that speakers of other dravidian languages have had their time in the sun too. Get off your high Tamil horse.

This was the same reason I said you have not understood the content of the article. It was neither a propaganda to project Tamils nor to denigrate Kannadigas. It's just a mere exposition how Dravida represented whole of South (and that included Gujarat and Maharashtra where the only Dravidian influence was that of Kannada kingdoms in the later period).

I speak Kannada with my mother. Therefore, I consider myself a Kannadiga. Thanks for your personal attacks. Makes me proud of my Kannadaness.

 (20 Jul 2006)