This blog post (is) interesting

Originally published at http://indopersica.blogspot.com

While switching between my native Tamil and Hindi/Marathi, it often strikes me how Tamil seems more ‘compact’, not only in terms of agglutination, but also in eliminating words where not ‘necessary’.

Take for example, simple subject-predicate sentences such as “My name is …”. Tamil does not use the word ‘is’, known as the copula; instead, it is implicit.

On the other hand, in Hindi, it is obligatory to use the copula ‘is’. In Marathi, one can get away without using it.

It got me thinking whether there is a pattern to this phenomenon. I scouted the Net for samples from various subcontinental languages of the sentence ‘my name is …’ –

Starting off with the most widely spoken languages –

Hindi - मेरा नाम अरविन्द है
Urdu - میرا نام اروند ہے
Hindi/Urdu IPA - /meːraˑ naːm ɐrʋɪn̪d̪ ɦɛˑ/

lit. “my name Arvind is”, following the general SOV syntax sequence of South Asian languages 


Further North –

Kashmiri - मॆ छु नाव अरविन्द
Kashmiri IPA - /me cʰu naːʋ ərʋin̪d̪/

lit. “my is name Arvind”, which makes Kashmiri the odd one out in following a SVO sequence


Moving westwards, we find that the scheme of things remains pretty much the same -

Panjabi - ਮੇਰਾ ਨਾਂ ਅਰਵਿੰਦ ਹੈ
Panjabi IPA - /meːraˑ nãˑ ərʋɪn̪d̪ ɛˑ/

Sindhi - منهنجو نالو اروند آهي
Sindhi IPA - /mũɦĩɟoˑ naːloˑ ɐrəʋin̪d̪ aːɦeˑ/

lit. “my name Arvind is”

Towards the western fringes of the subcontinent, the Iranian languages exhibit a very similar structure and syntax, with the  -

Pashto - زمه نوم اروند دی
Pashto IPA - /zəma nuːm ɐrʋin̪d̪ daj/

Balochi - منى نام اروند انت
Balochi IPA - /məni naːm ɐrʋin̪d̪ en̪t̪/

lit. “my name Arvind is”


Outside the western edge of the subcontinent, Farsi (Persian), a language that has heavily influenced subcontinental languages over the years, shows some variance in structure and syntax -

Farsi - اسمم اروینده
Farsi IPA - /esmæm ærʋinde/
lit. “name-my Arvind-is”

Farsi (Persian) does not use ‘personal pronouns’ per se, but uses a sort of pronomial suffix system, where the appropriate personal pronoun is suffixed to the noun,

In this case, the noun is اسم /esm/ - ‘name’, and the suffix م- /æm/, signifying ‘my’.

The copula is the /e/ following ‘Arvind’, again a suffix.


Back eastward, Nepali seems to behave in a fashion similar to the other northern subcontinental languages.

Nepali - मेरो नाम अरविन्द हो
Nepali IPA - /meːroˑ naːm ɒr(ɒ)bin̪d̪ ɦoˑ/
lit: “my name Arvind is”


But as we move further eastward, we find the copula disappearing in such simple subject-predicate sentences. Take for example Bangla (Bengali), Asamiya (Assamese) and Odia (Oriya) -

Bangla - আমার নাম অরবিন্দ
Bangla IPA - /amaɾ nam ɔɾobin̪d̪o/

Asamiya - মোৰ নাম অৰবিন্দ
Asamiya IPA - /moɹ nam ɒɹɔbindɔ/

Odia - ମୋର ନାମ ଅରବିନ୍ଦ
Odia IPA - /morɔ namɔ ɔrɔbin̪d̪ɔ/

lit. “my name Arvind”


A similar disappearing act is observed as we move down south, but in a more gradual fashion. Gujarati and Marathi make it sort of optional to use the copula, i.e., you will be correct if you use or don’t use the copula (Of course, in complicated sentences, this might not always apply, but we’re only talking about simple subject-predicate sentences here) -

Gujarati - મારું નામ અરવિંદ (છે)
Gujarati IPA - /maːru naːm ərwin̪d̪ (cʰeˑ)/

Marathi - माझं नाव अरविंद (आहे)
Marathi IPA - /maːzʱə naːw ərwin̪d̪ (aːɦeˑ)/

Lit. “my name Arvind (is)”


Go further south and the copula disappears completely -

Konkani - म्हजें नांव अरविंद
Konkani IPA - /mʱɔɟẽ nãːw ɔrwin̪d̪/

Kannada - ನನ್ನ ಹೆಸರು ಅರವಿಂದ್
Kannada IPA - /n̪ɐnnɐ ɦesər ɐrəʋin̪d̪

Telugu - నా పేరు అరవింద్
Telugu IPA - /naː peːr ɐrəʋin̪d̪/

Malayalam - എന്റെ പേര്‍ അരവിന്ദ്
Malayalam IPA - /ʲende peːr ɐrəʋin̪d̪/

Tamil - என் பெயர் அரவிந்த்
Tamil IPA - /ʲẽ peːr ɐrəʋin̪d̪/

Sinhala - මගේ නම අරවින්ද
Sinhala IPA – /maɡeː namə arəʋin̪d̪ə/

Divehi - އަހަރެންގެ ނަމަކީ އަރަވިންދް
Divehi IPA - /aɦəreŋɡe naməkiː arəʋin̪d̪/

lit. “my name Arvind”


We can observe the following -

1) Towards the east and south of the subcontinent, the use of the copula ‘to be’ (in any of its conjugated forms) declines or is completely eliminated.

The absence of the copula is very characteristic of Dravidian languages such as Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam and Tamil. And this absence of the copula seems to have influenced the Indo-Iranian Konkani, Sinhala and Divehi languages, which are spoken in areas in close geographic proximity to the Dravidian language areas.

In Indo-Iranian Gujarati and Marathi, the use of the copula verb ‘to be’ is more or less optional in the above examples. In Konkani, Sinhala and Divehi, not using the verb in such sentences is standard.

Indo-Iranian Bangla, Asamiya and Odia exhibit the loss of the copula, even though the copula is present in Tibeto-Burman and Mon-Khmer languages further east.


2) The general word order of most subcontinental languages is Subject-Object-Verb (SOV), with the odd exception like Kashmiri. This phenomenon too cuts right across language family lines and is noticed in various languages, be they Indo-Iranian, Dravidian or even Tibeto-Burman in origin.

(Yes, I know that the above example sentences don’t really contain a grammatical ‘object’, but just a predicate. The SOV rule still applies.)

Can anyone help me with example sentences in Sino-Tibetan, Tibeto-Burman or Mon-Khmer languages, such as Tibetan (Tibetan proper, Balti, Ladakhi, Dzongkha), Boro, Kokborok, Meiteilon, Imar Thar and Mizo?