1.
> I am asking for a moratorium on discussion on this topic.
....
[summary of discussion deleted]
2.
> considered somewhere in between), I would like to know if any other
> member of this group has,
>
> a) enjoyed the tenor of the discussion,
> b) changed one's stand on this issue
>
> Again, no more discussion on this topic, for a while. I will have more to
To reconcile 1 and 2, I'll take it that it's ok by RP garu to have
a "meta-discussion" and make a quick comment.
It seems to me, that, passions aside, the issue is whether PCSuri and
graandhikam have any legitimate place in telugu. One of the unfortunate
side effects of the tenor of the original grandhikam-vyavaharikam debate
was that a great many strong egos ended up bruised in the process. So,
then, it became a matter of "graandhikam naDDi viraggotteyyaDam" and similar
provocative sentiments, rather than what it really was, simply a quest for a
Telugu suited for the age of mass education and democracy. The hard feelings
and name calling on either side are uncalled-for in my opinion. In some
sense the debate itself is moot, if we remember that a language that is
unable to serve the needs of its speakers is no longer a live language.
So, what *is* the role for PCS-Telugu, if any? I see it as an important
"dialect" of Telugu, a rich storehouse for technical vocabulary and
samaasamulu. On the other hand, it is (to me) quite a stretch to say that
it is closer to "original" telugu. But despite this, I expect that
sishTa-vyaavahaarikam will continue to borrow from PCS-telugu.
Bapa Rao
> say on this next month. Extremely busy until then.
>
> Ramakrishna
>
>