Proto-Dravidian language

Proto-Dravidian is the linguistic reconstruction of the common ancestor of the Dravidian languages native to the Indian subcontinent. It is thought to have differentiated into Proto-North Dravidian, Proto-Central Dravidian, and Proto-South Dravidian, although the date of diversification is still debated.
As a proto-language, Proto-Dravidian is not itself attested in historical records. Its modern conception is based solely on reconstruction. It is suggested that the language was spoken in the 4th millennium BCE, and started evolving into various branches around 3rd-millennium BCE.
The origin and territory of the Proto-Dravidian speakers is uncertain, but some suggestions have been made based on the reconstructed Proto-Dravidian vocabulary. The reconstruction has been done on the basis of cognate words present in the different branches (Northern, Central and Southern) of the Dravidian language family.
According to Fuller (2007), the botanical vocabulary of Proto-Dravidian is characteristic of the dry deciduous forests of central and peninsular India. For the Southern Dravidians, this region extends from Saurashtra and Central India to South India. It thus represents the general area in which the Dravidians were living before the separation of branches.
According to Franklin Southworth (2005), the Proto-Dravidian vocabulary is characteristic of a rural economy based on agriculture, animal husbandry and hunting. However, there are some indications of a society more complex than a rural one:
This evidence is not sufficient to determine with certainty the territory of the Proto-Dravidians. These characteristics can be accommodated within multiple contemporary cultures, including:
Proto-Dravidian contrasted between five short and long vowels: *a, *ā, *i, *ī, *u, *ū, *e, *ē, *o, *ō. The sequences *ai and *au are treated as *ay and *av (or *aw).
Proto-Dravidian has been reconstructed as having the following consonant phonemes:
The singular alveolar plosive *ṯ developed into an alveolar trill /r/ in many of the South and South Central languages, it later merged with the tap in many of them; Tulu has /d͡ʒ, d̪, ɾ/ as reflexes, Manda-Kui made it /d͡ʒ/ and Hill-Maria Gondi made it /ʁ/. *ṯṯ and *nṯ became /r̥, nr/ in Konda and [tr, ndr] in many Tamil dialects. Apart from them, other languages did not rhotacize it, instead either preserving them or merging it with other sets of stops like dentals in Kannada, retroflexes in Telugu or palatals in Manda-Kui and some languages of Kerala. Central made all alveolars dental which is one of the features distinguishing it from South Central branch and North made it /r, s/. For example, Tamil āṟu, Tulu āji, Naiki sādi, Kui hāja; Tamil puṟṟu, Tulu puñca, Kannada huttu, Naiki puṭṭa, Konda puRi, Malto pute; Tamil onṟu, Tulu oñji, Pengo ronje, Brahui asi.
Velar nasal *ṅ occurred only before *k in Proto-Dravidian (as in many of its daughter languages). Therefore, it is not considered a separate phoneme in Proto-Dravidian. However, it attained phonemic status in languages like Malayalam, Gondi, Konda and Pengo because the original sequence *ṅk was simplified to *ṅ or *ṅṅ.
The glottal fricative *H has been proposed by Krishnamurti (2003) to account for the Old Tamil Aytam (Āytam) and other Dravidian comparative phonological phenomena.
P. S. Subrahmanyam reconstructs 6 nasals for PD compared to 4 by Krishnamurti, who also does not reconstruct a laryngeal.
The Northern Dravidian languages Kurukh, Malto and Brahui cannot easily be derived from the traditional Proto-Dravidian phonological system. McAlpin (2003) proposes that they branched off from an earlier stage of Proto-Dravidian than the conventional reconstruction, which would apply only to the other languages. He suggests reconstructing a richer system of dorsal stop consonants:
Below are some crop plants that have been found in the Southern Neolithic complex of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, along with their Proto-Dravidian or Proto-South Dravidian reconstructions by Southworth (2005). In some cases, the proto-form glosses differ from the species identified from archaeological sites. For example, the two Southern Neolithic staple grasses Brachiaria ramosa and Setaria verticillata respectively correspond to the reconstructed Proto-Dravidian forms for Sorghum vulgare and Setaria italica as early Dravidian speakers shifted to millet species that were later introduced to South India.
Basic vocabulary of Proto-Dravidian selected from Krishnamurti (2003):