From: selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering)
Subject: Re: Kamban, VaLLuvan and KaNNadhaasan
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:03:06 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.031415.26735@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, babu@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Natarajan Sureshbabu) writes:
> In article <BtnztC.BzD@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
> 
> >>  
> >>   `yaan-nOkkum kaalai nilan-nOkkum nOkkaakkaal
> >>    thaan-nOkki mella nagum.'
> >> 
> 
> 
> >          Please allow me to observe that ThiruvaLLuvar
> >          *does not* say 'avaL nagum'. If you read the 
> >          kuRaL carefully, you can perceive that VaLLuvar
> >          means "kaathaliyin uLLam" or her deeper feeling
> >          and not mere external facial "nagai". There is
> >          a deeper import and a more sublime love-feeling
> >          in vaLLuvar's words. I don't think vaLLuvar made
> >          any grammatically incorrect thodar in this kuRaL
> >          NOR is it any poetic licence. I honestly feel that
> >          vaLLuvar conveys a more sublime deeper love-feeling
> >          that's all. 
> >
> 
> 	uLLam eppadi nilanai nOkka mudiyum? 
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
            First, I don't think I said "uLLam" nOkkiyathu (I only
            talked about "nagum"). But it
            can ! Note the usages "nalla uLLaththOdu paar" "kuRukiya
            eNNaththOdu paarkkaathE" Further in Tamil "nOkku" means
            "to see something with an idea rather accutely". consider
            "nOkkam" means eNNam or intent. When vaLLuvar says
            "piRan manai nOkkaa peraaNmai" he means (it appears) that
            "the great manhood ( aaNkaRpu) of not _thinking_ of another
             man's woman" where "nOkkaa" means "not to see or think
            with any intent". He didn't mean "not to look" at another
            man's wife.  There is a difference.
           
            Let me try by a different approach ..

           If "uLLam" does not appear to sound appropriate to you, 
           would you accept "eyes" ( I don't think it can be insisted
           it should be onRan paal ??); if you accept "eyes", I want you
           to ask- do you think she was "looking" or "observing" the
           earth like a geologist. [ please don't think I'm ridiculing
           or trivializing, there is a reason for asking this question].
           I bet she would not have noticed even if a snake were to go
           by where she was "looking".
           In love many strange things happen; the leaves may look more
           green, the water may taste more sweet, one may "look" at something
           but can't see anything that is happening there.....

           Please note VaLLuvar clearly says  "thaan nOkki" here I would
           take the meaning "than uLLam" "nOkki". In the second kuRaL in the
           same "kuRipparithal" athikaaram VaLLuvar says "kaN kaLavu koLLum
           chiRu nOkkam". What meaning would you take ? Would you say the
           eye ( "kaN" ) steals ?! Please try to understand with "kavi
           uLLam". [ take the right meaning for the "kavi" (-: ]. If you
           carefully read the kuRaL you can write a 5 page or 50 page
           essay on this kuRaL.
               
> Note that vaLLuvar uses nokkum also in onRan paal.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

       How did you arrive at this conclusion ? avai nOkkum, kaNkaL paarkkum
       kaalkaL nOgum .. are wrong usages ? 
       vaLLuvar says though "thaan nOkki" where the subject is very clear
       which is "thaan". One can expand "thaan" as  "than uLLam" or
       "than kaathal nenju/uLLam" "nOkki nagum". "thaan" can be expanded
       as "ones self" and so on... 
> 
> There is some part of tamil grammer called vazhu-amaithi.
> 
> This one falls under paal vazhu-amaithi. i.e onRan paal 
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      I don't think it is one. I'm not an expert on grammar or 
      poetic tradition, but in this instance it appears no such
      "amaithi" need be applied in my opinion.

> being used instead of peN paal. I do not know, the 
> conditions under which, such practice is allowed.
> But, note that that will not be a kuRal veNpa, if
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the onRan paal were not used. ( Yes, vaLLuvar could
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      I don't understand why ???
      Would you please explain ?

> have come up with something else with the same meaning,
> but I guess he was feeling tired already, having completed 
> two sections :-)  )
> 
> Bye,
> Babu 


Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil