Linguistic Identity and Growth of Language Consciousness:

Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate, 1920-1935r

by
Sandagomi CoPerahewa

Introduction
The beginning of the twentieth century saw a remarkable
social, political and cultural change in Sri Lankan society. On the
one hand, there were social and religious reform movements,

ideological and literary movements, a renewal of interest in

linguistic and historical studies, and a growth of nationalist ideas.
On the'other hand, this period also saw the beginnings of
representative government, and the introduction of electoral politics
and franchise into the political arena.2 The English-educated elite
were politically involved in these constitutional reform activities,
though political organizations were confined to educated elites and
showed little interest in mass politics. At the same time, local elites
and intellectuals were interested in social, cultural and political
issues, and developed a set of ideas which became extremely
influential in the formation of modern Sinhala and Thmil identities.
Historians have frequently emphasised the importance of Buddhism'
in the formation of national identity at the turn of the twentieth
century but less attention has been given to the role oflanguage in
this process. Howeveq sociolinguist K.N.O. Dharmadasa has shown
the significance of both language and religion in the formation of

modern Sinhala nationalism.3 He traces the development of

Sinhalese nationalism by focussing particularly on the Sinhala
language, and how it relates to Sinhala ethnic consciousness and
national identity. It would be very useful to examine in some detail
the beginnings of the use of language factor as an important
formative feature in the country's socio-cultural and intellectual
life. The central concern of this paper is to locate the relationship

54

Linguistic Identity

ad

Growth ofLanguage Consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

between language history and linguistic consciousness in the context

ofphilological research and language debates ofthe earlytwentieth

century. In particular, language history figured prominently in this

emerging linguistic consciousness. Here I want to discuss the

intellectual background of sinhala and ramil ethnolinguistic

identity and the politicization of linguistic scholarship in the 1920s
and 1930s. This paper will show how the history of language and
the growth oflanguage consciousness generated new discourses
of linguistic identity, thus fu elling controversies and ethnolinguistic
divisions between Sinhalese and Tamils.

Language and Genetic Affinities

Linguist John E. Joseph notes in his work Language and

Identity,'the historical identification of ,a language, has always

been closely connected with the establishment of a national, ethnic

or religious identity."4 The 'Indo Aryan, identity of the Sinhala

language was an important topic in scholarly discourse and one of
the vital components in the national and cultural movements in

early twentieth century Sri

Lanka. A major

reason

for this

phenomenon was the nineteenth century and early twentieth century

philological work related to the Indian languages. This scholarship,
on the one hand, tried to explain the 'genetic' relationship between

languages, and on the other hand, established different .language

families'according to their linguistic structure. For example, Rw.
Rolert Caldwell (1819-1891), in his A Comprehensive Grammar

of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of Language (1356),

argued that there was 'no direct affinity'between the Sinhala and

Tamil languages, and this work provided the foundation for the
construction of 'Dravida' identity.s During the second decade of
the twentieth century the term 'Dravidian' gained a racial as well
as a linguistic connotation, to denote South Indian in general and
Thmils in particular. Furthermore, Caldwell's work on Dravidian
languages created an awareness ofthe antiquity and independence
of the Tinmil language.6 The modern linguistic consciousness of
Thmils can be traced to this period, and historical publications
helped to stimulate a growing-sense of ramil identity linked with
language.? In Sri Lanka, scholars began to claim linguistic and

Sandagomi CoPerahewa

New Series Vol. LV

lndia,
racial connections between the Sinhalese andAryans ofNorth
origin. This
as distinct from the Dravidian Thmils of South Indian
of the
classification
idea, however, led to an ethnolinguistic
not.
were
Tamils
as a people of Aryan stock, while the
Sinhalese

consequently, the Aryan-Dravidian distinction originated as a

linguistic discourse, but was later utilized to denote racial
differences as well.
Manyschoiarshaveacknowledgedtheimportanceofracial
ideology in itre formation of modern Sinhala and Thmil ethnic
identities and the political use of the national past.8 Sri Lankan
historian R.A.L.H Gunawardana has argued that it was during the
period of colonial rule that Sinhala consciousness underwent a
iadical transformation and began to assume its current form.e He
discusses the influence of racialist linguistic theories which.
originated in Europe. Gunawardana believes that scholars in late
ninleenth centurySri Lanka took up Max Miiller's theories and
added a racialist content into Sinhala nationalist thought. Already
in the mid-nineteenth century for example, language loyalists like
James De Alwis (1823-1878) had stressed the 'antiquity'of the
Sinhala language and the 'greatness' of Sinhala civilization.lo As
early as 1851, he had considered Sinhala as the 'national language'
and Buddhism as the 'national religion' of the Sinhalese; and had
stressed the Indo-Aryan purity of sinhala. These ideas were
published long before the appearance of caldwell's and Miiller's
works. Therefore another sinhalese scholar K.N.O. Dharmadasa
rejects Gunawardana's analysis, and argues that it is wrong to
ascribe De Alwis's language nationalism solely to European
sources, but rather that it can be considered as a "periodic expression
of a continuous ideological tradition."ll More recently, while
drawing attention to the modes of oral and written forms of cultural
transmission, Michael Roberts has shownthe existence of a Sinhala
consciousness, which predates British rule'r2
Arya Sinhala ldentitv. HistoricalWorks and Linguistic Identity
The first three decades of the twentieth century witnessed
a new and increasing awareness of linguistic identity among the

56

Linguistic Identity and Growth ofLanguage Consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

Sinhalese and Tamils. This was more than a new understanding of

an old phenomenon. Rather, the literary and linguistic past of the

Sinhalese was evoked as a means to promote historical

consciousness and nationalist sentiments. Some Sinhalese scholars

tried to show the affrnity of the Sinhala language to Sanskrit, pali

and other Aryan dialects of India. In 1 900, writing a treatise on the
origin and structure of the Sinhala language, Wp. Ranesinghe, a

bilingual Sinhalese scholar, gave the Indo-Aryan equivalents side

by side with their Sinhala cognates, in order to show how Sinhala
related with Sanskrit, Pali, Prakrit and the "Aryan dialects,, of lndia.
l3

The knowledge of linguistic history provided very suitable

material for the early leaders of Sinhala nationalist movement. For
example, as early as 1912, the most dyramic Sinhala Buddhist
nationalist of the time, Anagarika Dharmapala (1864 -1933),
invoked the 'Aryan' idea of the Sinhala race in order differentiate
it from Tamil. He tried to establish an ideological link between
Buddhism, the Sinhala race (Sinhala jatiya)\ and the Sinhala
language. He used "Aryan" as a racial category which allowed
him to describe the Sinhalese as an ancient people, different from
other ethnic communities of the island. By ernphasizing the Aryan
character of the Sinhala language, he popularised the idea of Aryasinhala identity. Dharmapala's main concern was the revitalization
of Buddhism and the affrrmation of the Sinhala-Buddhist identity.

But his views on Sinhala-Buddhist identity had a linguistic

dimension. The most important element of this discourse was an
identification of Sri Lanka with Buddhism and the Sinhala race. In
addition, he linked the Sinhala language with Buddhism and the

Sinhalese'Aryan' race.
By this tirne, piriverea scholars had promoted the study of
Pali and Sanskrit, and its classical literature as a part of the pirivena
education. They considered the Sinhala language as an offspring
of Pali and Sanskrit. In this discourse Pali and Sanskrit were
considered as 'parent' or 'mother languages' (matru bhasha) of
Sinhala. Dharmapala took maximum advantage of this linguistic
awareness, and made an attempt to link the "Aryan Sinhalese

Smdagomi Coperahewa

New Seies VoL LV

Buddhists" with an "Aryan" language. He became an active

promoter of the Pali and Sanskrit languages. For example, he
stressed the affrnity between Sanskrit, Pali and Sinhala, as 'Aryan'
languages, and popularized the idea of an Aryan language (A,rya
bhasha) and Aryan race (Arya iatiya):
The only race which has maintained noble principles down

its generations is the Aryan race. The only language with fully
articulated sounds and complete letters is the Aryan language '..
The Sinhala language developed with the Aryan Sanskrit and Pali
languages as its origin. The only way in which one can know about
the ancient Sinhalese who had noble qualities is through the Sinhala
language.15

These ideas though motivated by religion, were at the same

time promoted a sense ofthe racial uniqueness of the Sinhalese as

At this time, Dharmapala's powerful impact led

many to adopt traditional Arya Sinhala names instead of English
or Portuguese names, and it clearly shows the linguistic dimension
of his movement. He urged that the 'Aryan Sinhalese'should go
by Arya Sinhala names. This attitude is apparent in the Sinhala
novels of the period, particularly those of Piyadasa Sirisena. In his
best-selling novel, the hero Jayatissa is well-versed in Sinhala,
Pali and Sanskrit, and bears anAryan ntune, but all the villains are
denationalised with names like Donald Silva, Alphonso Perera and
Vincent Perera. This novel also provides a debate about Aryan
names.l6 By the 1920s there was a general trend in Sinhalese society
to adopt Arya-Sinhala names. Many Sinhalese intellectuals
abandoned their Anglo-Portuguese names and adopted AryaSinhala names in order to defend their Sinhalese identity.lT

a linguistic group.

In parallel to the Sinhalese situation, Gunasingam has

shown that, during Western colonial rule, Sri Lankan Tamils also
realised the importance oftheir own religious, cultural and linguistic
identity. r8 The linguistic and religious awakeniqg among the Tbmil
Hindus in the northern district of Jaffira was largely due to the
pioneering efforts of Arumuga Navalar (1822-1879) in the
nineteenth century. Navalar reinforced Tamil as the language of

58

Linguistic Identity md Growth ofLanguage Consciousness: Indo A4ran vs Dravidian Debate,

Saiva Siddhantha, and moreover it was to be held "sacred and as a

mother."re There was a close connection between Saivism and the
Thmil language in the religious culture of Timils in Jaffira society.
This awakening, which began in the religious sphere, later extended
into linguistic and literary fields. As Kailasapathy observes, "with

the shifting of focus from religion to language, the importance

hitherto attached to Saivism became less significant."2o Thus,
beginning in the 1920s, Tamil consciousness came to dominate
academic, intellectual and socio-political life. In 1918, The Hindu
Organ newspaper pointed out the need for a separate institution
for the promotion of oriental studies among the Tamil Hindus, and
mentioned that the oriental institutions of the Sinhalese (mainly
pirivenas) would be unsuitable as no provision is made in them for
higher Tamil studies. 2r The Oriental Studies Society of Jaffna was
reorganized during 1921 on the lines of the Colombo Society, and
efforts were made to encourage the study of Sanskrit and Tamil
classics.22 At this time, Thmil 'revivalist' scholars of South India
took pride in the heritage ofTimil culture, as well as in the historical
status ofTamil. For example, Subramania Bharathi (1882-192I), a
famous South Indian Tamil poet, declared: "Thmil has the same
historical status as Sanskrit, andTamil might well be the vehicle of
modern thought, and must be the medium of government and of
education."s
During this period several Thmil scholars in Sri Lanka also
emphasized the antiquity of the Tamil language, and thc historical
links of Thmils.2a Dravidian identity of the Tamil language began
gaining momentum in opposition to the dominant discourse of IndoAryan Sinhala. Accordingly, the first three decades ofthe twentieth
century were a period of linguistic and historical research into the
early history of Tamils in Sri Lanka. The separate historical past of

the Jaffna Tamils was emphasised as a part of this scholarly

endeavour. The main historical writings on Thmils included C.
Rasanayagam's ( I 8 70- I 940) farnous w ork Anci ent Jaffna (1926),
and Fr. S. Gnananprakasar's (1875-1947) The Jaffua Kingdom.
Until the early 1920s, Tamilnadu and Jaffira were considered as
one cultural and religious unit.5 In the 1920s and 1930s, there

Sandagomi Coperahewa

New Series Vol.

LI/

was a scholarly effort to separate Jaffira from Tamilnadu and to

establish a Tamil identity connected with Sri Lanka. Tamil writers
began to make arguments for Jaffira as an independent, culturally

sefarate kingdom. Most importantly, Tamil historical works

prlvided a coherent picture of the Tamil kingdom in Jaffira' For
journal
lxample, in 1922, C. Rasanayagam wrote an article in the
of the Royal Asiatic Society on the theme of the 'Tamil Kingdom
of Jaffirai.26 The Tamil language spoken in Jaffira also provided a
distinct identity to the ancient history of Tamils. Moreover,
historically grounded claims of the relationship between language
and territtiy provided a consciousness about the territorial
boundaries of the Thmil language. In 1928, a Jaffna based English
newspaper stated that "national awakening in a country is the
maniiestation of its devotion to its language and literature."2T
Around this time a number of societies and associations were also
formed in Jaffira in order preserve, develop and protect the Tamil
language and culture. In the 1920s the JaffiraYouth congress was
*itn social and cultural issues and the promotion of Timil
T In this way linguists and writers played
"on."*.d
language and literature.
u t y -t. in the elaboration of cultural and linguistic traditions
that tontributed to establishing a separate ethnolinguistic identity
for Tamils.
It was at this time, that the word 'Eelam' (North-East
regions as homeland of Thmils) was introduced into country's
potitical vocabulary. The expression 'Tamil Eelam'for the Tamilinttubit"d northern-eastern regiorrs of Sri Lanka was used for the
first time by Ponnambalam Arunachalam. In his address to the
Ceylon Tamil Leaguein l9}3,Arunachalam said:
We should keep alive and propagate those ideals throughout
ceylon and promote the union and solidarity of what we have been
proud to call Tamil Eelam. We desire to preserve our individuality
2e
as a people, to make ourselves worthy of our inheritance'
Discussing the politics of the Tamil past, HellmannRajanayagam states that the term 'Tamil Eelam'was widely used
in itte tate tq30s to denote the meaning of 'belonging to the Thmils',

60

Linguistic Identity and Growth of Lmguage consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

the term currently used in Tamil nationalism.3o Before that, it was

not used in that sense. For instance, Navalar used llankai or llam
to denote the island as a whole.3t At the same time, we can also
find a scholarly interest on the word Eelam, a term that received
much attention ofthe Thmil nationalists of post-independence era.
Thmil scholars like Rasanayagam arguedthat Sri Lankawas known
to the ancient Thmils as llam,and from Ilam came Silam, Sihalam
and Sinhalam.He further pointed out that "the name Ilam, which
was also given to Ceylon, has some affinity with its earlier language

Elu."32 Commenting on this point, a Sinhalese scholar, Mendis

Gunasekara, remarked that llam is derived from pali Sthala or
'
Sanskrit,Srnhalam.33 The Madras Thmil lexicon, complied between
1924 and 1936, under the authority of the University of Madras
also took the same view.s These arguments about words and phrases
clearly show the growth of scholarly interest in the linguistic history
and identity during this period.

It is interesting to

note that these ideas flared up in the

1920s, a time when Sinhala-Tamil relations in the mainstream

political movement reached a turning point. Identity politics and

communalism became an important part of the political and
constitutional sphere. Between I92I and 1924, GovernorWilliam
Manning introduced a series of constitutional reforms, which
resulted in increased representation for the Sri Lankans in the
legislature. In 1921, the principal leaders of the country,s Thmil
minority withdrew from the Ceylon National Congress (CNC), and
Sinhala-Tamil competition became a perennial feature of
constitutional reform debates in the political arena. 3s As a result
the CNC became an organization of the Sinhalese; the Tamil
politicians formed a separate, Timil-only political organization,
Thmil Mahajana sabhai (1921) to agitate for the interests of their
community as a responsetotheMahajana Sabhc1movement of the
sinhalese.s This political split between the Sinhalese and rhmils

in the

1920s and 1930s paralleled changing scholarly

understandings, which in turn influenced popular thinking about
language.

Smdagomi CoPerahewa

New Seies

VoL

LV

6l

Attheendofthefirstdecadeofthetwentiethcenturythere
history- and
was a revival of interest in the country's languages,
(1902)
took akeen
archaeology. The Committee of Oriental Studies
of oriental
interest iniire promotion and encouragement of the study
languageslPa-li,SanskritandSinhala)andliteratureofthecountry'

By-thi-stime,schooltextbooks,translationsofancientPali
to an
chronicles, and the recording of inscriptions contributed
Sinhalese.3T
awareness of the historical and linguistic past of the

particularly
More importantly, revival of the historical tradition,
late
u, u ,.ruit of the Sinhala translation of the Mahavamsa inthe
gaye
nineteenth century (1877) and the archaeological findings'
the
to
related
stories
strength to this national consciousness. The
through
Mahivamsagained popularity among the Sinhalese readers
Sinhala publications, and also inculcated a patriotic consciousness
some
and love for their own native community'38 There were
The
Lanka'
specialized historical works published on ancient Sri
study
most significant work was the English translation of a critical
Indologist
German
the
by
of the Mahavamsa and' Dipavamsa
In
Wilhelm Geiger (1856-1943)' which was published in 1908'
!935, a scholar-monk frorn the Vidyodoya Pirivena'-Yagirala
fall of
Pragnananda updated the Mahavamsa nanative from the
historical
These
5.
year
193
fariOy - ttte hsf native kingdom - to the
the
writings provided an impetos to sinhala nationalist leaders of
past
twentieth century to trace the connections between an ancient
ethnic
and to claim that "the Sinhala language and the Sinhala
history."3e
of
identity had been always present sinie the beginning

At the same time, much interest was shown in the ruined

almost
cities ofAnuradhapura and Polonnaruwa, which were found
deserted in the eaily nineteenth century. In the years 1910-1920,
and
the Department ofArchaeology carried out various excavation
these
during
restoration works at many archaeological sites. It was
years that more and moie Sinhalese inscriptions werecopied.and
published for scholarly purposes. These were printed especially
in the volumes of the Eprg r aphi a Zeylani c a ( 1 904 - 1 9 I 2) and other
publications ofthe Deiartmint. More importantly, these historical
iinguistic records prorrid.d solid evidence which enabled scholars

62

Linguistic Identity md Growth ofLanguage consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

to trace the origins and the contentious history of sinhala from as

early as the third century B.C. In 1938, Wilhelm Geiger wrote,
"... [t]hanks to that epigraphical and editorial activity, we are now
in a position to trace the development of the Sinhalese language
much better and in more detail than thirty or forty years ago.,,,ro
The epigraphical and archaeological work ofH.C.p. Bell, D.M. De
Zilva wickremasinghe (1s65-1937) and Senarat paranavitana
(1896-1972) brought to the Sinhalese in particular "a pride in their
past, sometimes accompanied by a disparagement oftheir present,
which has become a part ofthe national make-up."4r These findings
were at first reported in the sessional Papers of the Archaeological
Survey of Ceylon, the Orientalist, the Journal of the Royal Asiatic

Society (Ceylon Branch) and the Ceylon Antiquary and Literary

Register through the medium of English.a2 Subsequently, another
group of Sinhalese scholars disseminated the findings of these
historical, archaeological and linguistic discoveries for a wider

general public through Sinhala periodicals and books.a3 This

revelation of the island's past through the Sinhala language was
one of the strongest foundations on which linguistic nationalism
was built, and it stimulated the language loyalty attitudes of the
Sinhalese. Against this background, the origin and history of the
Sinhala language became a topic of scholarly interest.
ADebate about the Origin of Sinhala: IndoAryan vs Dravidian,
1920-1935

In this section I will contextualise scholarly research in

relation to Sinhala and Tamil, and their impact on the growth of
linguistic consciousness. Most importantly, philological and
historical research into Sinhala during the late nineteenth and early
twentieth century contributed to the understanding ofthe historical
and genetic relationships between other Indo-Aryan languages and
Sinhala. The identification of Sinhala as an 'Indo-Aryan language,
and Thmil as a 'Dravidian language'created a clear linguistic and
ethnic differentiation between the Sinhalese and Tamils. Both
Sinhalese and Thmils began to take the notion of "Dravidian,,Thmils
and "Ar5ran" Sinhalese as depicting racially distinct categories. a

Sandagomi Coperahewa

New Seies VoL LV

It is important to mention that the 1920s also marked the

beginning of modern language studies in Sri Lanka. Around this
time Sinhalese politicians and scholars were able to get government
support for the study of Sinhala and for linguistic research. For
example, the establishment of the Ceylon University College in
l92l contributed to the systematic study of oriental languages Pali, Sanskrit, Sinhala.as There was an honours course in Oriental
languages, with Sinhala and Thmil as two of the subjects which
could be taken, as well as in the classical languages, Sanskrit and

Pali. This

emergent discipline gave impetus

to

the

institutionalisation of language studies, and the scholarly activities

of the University College were centred mainly on the philological
research into Sinhala and Pali: The study of Sinhala at this time

. In l925,the President
ofthe RoyalAsiatic Society (Ceylon Branch) and alsothe Colonial
Secretary Cecil Clementi, delivered his Presidential address to the
society on the theme, 'Prolegomena to the Scientific Study of the
Sinhalese Language', and made the point that the Sinhalese
language was peculiar to Ceylon and had a unique claim upon the
attention of the Colony as being a distinctively Ceylonese product.
The Sinhalese language, for this reason, must clearly occupy first
place in this Society's linguistic studies, both from the point of
view of the Government and of the people."6
began to receive the attention of government

As this suggests, the colonial government was more

positive towards Sinhala, and gave more emphasis to work related
-C
to S inhala than to Tamil . The editoria I of The eylon Heratd pointed
out this state of affairs in the following manner: "Although there is
a superficial cry for the vernaculars, yet the people of Jaffira have
not so far encouraged, fostered and financed in a tangible way".a?
This period saw the beginning of various governmental
language planning activities and linguistic research to promote the
Sinhala language. The most important linguistic project was the

Sinhala dictionary.

In

1927, the compilation of the Sinhala

Etyrnological Dictionary began, as a project of the Royal Asiatic

Society (Ceylon Branch) and with government patronage under
the editorship of D.B Jayatilaka (1368-1944), a statesman and

64

Linguistic Identity and Growth of Language Consciousness; Indo Arym vs Dravidian Debate'

reputed Sinhala scholar. As a scholar-politician Jayatilaka had close

relationships with the scholar monks of the Vidydlankara Pirivena

in colombo, and also withthe colonial offrcials andthe university

College.a He made possible attempts to encourage the study of
Sinhaia and to revive the language for modern purposes, and he
held apolitically influential position onthe State Council of Ceylon
from iis inception in 1931. Consequently, he was able to get the

support of colonial authorities to begin work on the sinhala

dictionary. Around the same time, systematic historical studies of
the Sinhaia language, carried out by European Orientalists and local

scholars, helped to identiff the 'Indo-Aryan', linguistic character

of the Sinhala language. More importantly, Wilhelm Geiger's

writings on the Sinhala language also had a pioneering influence

on this historical linguistic scholarship. On his first arrival to the
island in December 1895, Geiger stated that 'the purpose of his
visit was to study Sinhala for scientific purposes in order to see if
the language came under the Aryan category because in Europe
there was controversy on this point'"ae

New Seies Vol. LV

Smdagomi Coperahewa

in the field of historical linguistics. At the same tirne, these linguistic

researches and discoveries led to many controversies among

scholars on the issue of the origin of Sinhala and its Indo-Aryan

linguistic character.

s3

One such controversy was the Indo-Aryan and Dravidian

debate about the origin of the Sinhala language which emerged in
the 1920s and 1930s. This debate took place in scholarly journals,
and it was a clear example of the growing awareness of linguistic
consciousness among the Sinhalese and Tinmil scholars of the day.
It should also be noted, howeveq that prior to this period - especially
few scholars had argued about the
in the nineteenth century
Dravidian origin of the Sinhala language.sa Indeed, when writing
in 1867 on the origin of the Sinhala language, James De Alwis
strongly statedthat, "the Sinhalese is an affiliated dialect of Sanskrit,
and bears no affinity to the Dravidian or South -Indian class of
languages."ss On the topic of Timil words in Sinhala, De Alwis

explained:
We know that the northern provinces of this island have

At the time of Geiger's first visit to the island (in 1895)

been, from very ancient times, held by Tamilians; and that after the

there was a Sinhala- Buddhist revivalist movement, and his writings

show that his "syrnpathies were on the side of the nationalists,"s

fall of the great Sinha dynasty in Ceylon, the island was governed
by Indian princes of undoubted Dravidian origin, between whom,
and the Sinhalese, a warfare had been previously carried on,
commencing from a period so far back as the age ofthe memorable
Dutugemunu. It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, to expect in the
Sinhalese an admixture of Dravidian words.tr

In

1931 he was invited to direct the work of the Sinhala

Eqrmological Dictionary project under the patronage ofthe colonial

goverffn-ent. Work onthe Sinhala dictionary proceeded slow! and
its first part appeared only in 1935. In the introduction of this
dictionary Geiger and Jayatilaka provided a periodizalion of the

evolution of the Sinhala language - beginning from the third or

fourth centurytothethirteenth century - which cameto gaingeneral
acceptance among language scholars.5l This laid the foundations
for the historical study of Sinhala, and the editors of the Sinhala
Dictionary stated, "it is an indisputable fact that the Sinhalese
Language is one of the Modern Indo-Aryan Vernaculars and stands
in a tine with Gujarati, Marathi, Bengali, Hindustani etc'"52
Furthermore, Geiger's etymological studies on" Sinhala created
awareness about linguistic affrnities between Sinhala and other
lndo-Aryan languages and aroused the interest of Sinhala scholars

As this suggests many Sinhalese scholars of this period

recognized the mixture of Sinhala vocabulary and they were aware
of its Indo-Aryan origin. 57 Historical linguistic research inthe 1930s
also stated that non-Aryan influences - not necessarily Dravidian
only, but pre-Dravidian as well - had been at work in the
development of the Sinhala language.s8 Due to its geographical
proximity to Dravidian languages, the Sinhala language shared
many features, grarnmatical as well as lexical, with the Tamil
language. This peculiar influence of Tiamil on Sinhala led to a
controversy about the linguistic character ofthe Sinhala language.

66 Linguistii

Identity md Growth ofLanguage Consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

The issue of the Dravidian element in Sinhala, however,

became a controversial topic in the 1920s and 1930s, and reflects

the utilization of historical linguistic scholarship to indicate

linguistic identity. ln a lecture atAnanda Collage, Colombo, on 28
September 1918, the distinguished Sinhala scholar and member of
the Royal Asiatic Society Ceylon Branch, W.F. Gunawardhana
( 136l -1935) declared that there were affrnities between the Sinhala
and Tamil languages. ln l92l,he read a paper entitled "The Aryan
Question in Relation to India" at the Royal Asiatic Society and
based his argument on the Dravidian origin of the Sinhalese race
and language:

The Sinhalese are a Dravidian race slightly modified by a

Mongoloid strain and an Aryan wash... in their culture, which is
later, they are Aryan. In the basic principles of their grammar, the
Sinhalese are Dravidian; in grammatical flexion and vocabulary
which form the superstructure of the language, they are Aryan.se

Gunawardhana reiterated these viern's in the English

Introduction to the Siddhanta Parlkshnaya in 1924.

found that some of the main features of Singhalese

grammar are quite out of tune with their Aryan analogues, while
all principles of fundamental importance fullyharmonize withtheir
Tamil equivalents and fall in naturally with Dravidian idiom. This
forced on me the conclusion that the structural foundations of the
Sinhalese language are Dravidian, while its superstructure, i.e., the
vocabulary is Aryan.@
Gunawardhana's idea

of 'Dravidazalion of Sinhala'

provoked a considerable debate on the issue oforigins of Sinhala,

and there was a strong reaction to it from other Sinhala scholars.
ln reply to the above lecture Abraham Mendis Gunasekara, another

well-known Sinhalese scholar and RAS member, said that

"

theories and inferences are not supported by

facts," and quoted the ideas of Professor Max Miiller and G.A.
Grierson to prove the Aryan origin of the Sinhala language. He
fur*rer said that the idea that "the Sinhalese are of Dravidian descent
or that their language has a Dravidian origin, is now an exploded

Gunawardhana's

Sandagomi CoPerahewa

New Series Vol. LV

that Sinhala is a Dravidian

theory."6r In order to refute the theory
the Ceylon Civil Service
of
an Indian, M.H' Kantawala
and Literary
series of articles in The Ceylon Antiquary
and described
nn[irte, ontSre "SiohJ." andtheAryan Languages" genealogical
modern Indian languages in a

;;;;g",
;ffi;

the evolution of the

one looks at it " '
i"t-. t He said, "from whatever standpointelse
butAryan in its
nothing
Sinhalese is Aryan, whollyAryan and
Kantawala' Gunawardhala
structure."63 Writing u ttioittOtt to
is an idea
.gt.d that "the Aryan claim on behalf of the Sinhalese
based
Mnller'
of Max
of recent date, originJing from the lectures
that the vocabulary of the
on i.ugi"ution, aid uia.A Uv the fact
extent Aryan'"s
Sinhalese language it * u "tty considerable
Tamil scholar
S"pp"*tg tft prarridiat' o'igin of Siotrata' in lg27'a
article to the RAS journal
Rev. S. Gnana Prakasar, coritributed an
of Language" tried to-study
on the 'Place of Tamil i" the Sciettce
language' and-concluded'
the early word-bases or roots of Tamil
to the
"it is our deliberate opinion that Tamil roots take us back
origin of the language."6t
Furthermore, in Decembet 1934' Rev' Gnana-f1ak3sar
Element in Sinhalese'
presented a paper .*ittta 'The Dravidian
In this paper
lnd recalledGunawardhana's ideas on the subject.
Dravidian elements of the
Gnana Prakasar atte'mpted to show the
between these two
Sinhala grarnmar' ,yntu* and connections
scholars
families of language. However, many Sinhalese
could not stand up
commented that Gnam"a Prakasar's conclusions
lecture' bhikkhu
to scientific *utyri..; In reaction to the above
College' in
R. Siddharthu, u 1."t,,.' in Sinhala at the University
relation with the
ii, pup., on 'the Indian languages and their
betweenNorth Indian
Sinhalese t*grrug.,l ,howed tf,e similarities
opinion JhatJhe Sinhalese
dialects and Sinhala, and e"pressed the
Indian (or an Aryan)
fung,rug. is " derived direcily from aNorth
an Aryan
lanluale."ut He concluded: "sinhalese is therefore
both
languages
Indian
language closelv t.i",ta to the North
relation
only contactual
morphologically arrdgenealoeig{I1 lyg
*
and JayatilakaGeiger
1935'
withthe Dravidiania:nguugt '" in

68

Linguistic Identity and Growth ofLanguage consciousness: Indo

Arym vs Dravidian Debate,

founder editors of the Sinhalese Dictionary

remarked: .,It is, no

doubt, a splendid proofofthe proud nationut r".urrg ofthe

Sinhaiese
people that they were able to preserve the Aryan
character of their
language in spite oftheir geographical isolation.'@Around
the same
time, in response to above linguistic arguments on the Dravidian
character of sinhala, Geiger expressed his views on this issue
in an
article entitled 'The Linguistic character of sinhalese, to
goyal
the

Asiatic Society (ceylon) journal in r937.In this article c.iie,

asserted that "the Sinhalese language belongs to the Aryan
grirp

of Indian dialects and has descended through FaFprakrit

fro;old-

Indian (sanskrit)."70 In order to prove thelndo-Aryan character

of
sinhala, Geiger cited both historical and linguistic arguments.
In
1938, Geiger published_l Grammar of the Sinhalese-Language,
a
historical grammar of sinhala in English, to present u gru,o-u,
which would be "at least a step in advance and nearer to oir goal
the full and correct knowledge of the Sinhalese languag-e, its
character and its development.,,Tr

This Indo-Aryan and Dravidian debate on sinhala received

the attention of the contemporary English and Sinhala press.

Gunawardhana wrote severar articles to th" English r.*.pup..,
and tojournals to disseminate his views.72 Howevir, the idea
oithe

Dravidian origin of sinhala was

disturbing phenomenon for many

sinhala newspapers. writing an editorial on-'Are Sinhalese
ofrhmir

Stock?'

not

in the period did

sensitive topic, and nationalist sentiments
this area''s Gunawardhana's view
encourage research p''"s'''its in
scholar' He recalls the
was not supported UV *V other Sinhala
comments on the relationship
adverse response to his public
between Sinhala and Dravidian:
in the lectur:'.tht't'
But when I came out with my theory
myself in the
found
I
me'
was yet anotheruu,p'i" in store foi
of a fortified camp turned
position of an inuua"i *ti by the garrison
'"ri f" ntff force and in great excitement' to beat the invader as
the
*"tft r had been i'eaten of it seemed' who had made

-*V

same reckless venture before'76

the Sinhala language

This Aryan-Dravidian debate about
of the linguistic history
was an outcome of the growing awareness
confined to scholarly
of both languages. ift-""gft ii was *u-gly
differentiation between the
circles, it provided tft"ti linguistic
"
san find some general
two languages' By the mid iq:ot we
Cooncil with regard to the controversy

Gunwardhana.T3 Even Sinhala grammar books

ofthis time discussed

this debate, which shows the significance of this controversy
at
that time. For instance, Theodore G. perera, in his introduction
to
sinhala Bhashava, mentioned that "the Sinhala language has,
for
sometimes past ... been a theme for speculatio.r, esfeciilly
on the
part of some non-Sinhalese students to whom, in spite
tr tn.i,
erroneous views and misleading statements with regard
to past
history and philology, we are greatly indebted.,'74

It should be noted here that this debate

became a main
topic at a time whenthe Arya-sinhara identity was dominant in
the
Sinhala nationalist discourse. This debate became a politically

ii

;;;;t

ttt. Stutt

In
between the Dravi-JJ"-uiO Aryan "t'ltuttt'
inthe Council
Pathmanathan, aTamil member said

1934'

R'

Sri

civilization
Ours is a civilization older eventhantheAryan
to the
extending
culture
pre- Aryan

Sinhala newspaper condemned the ideas of

New Series Vol. LV

Smdagomi CoPerahewa

and we, Dravidians, hu.ro' u

preserve this Dravidian

time of Mohenjodaro' We famits must
us of which we need not he
civilization. We ttuut u past behind
ashamed.

T?

of the Sinhalese as an
As we observed earlier' the identity
was constructed on the
"Aryan tace," *a tftt fut"ils as Dravidian
1930s this language awareness
basis oflanguage difference' Bythe
both

itttff into a popular consciousness' and

to preserve their-distinct
communitie, n .JJ1o u.t potiti"ally
most notable figure in

had transfor^.a

ethnolinguisti. iO."iitv' ohuttupulu'.ihe

in 1933' and by that-time'
the Sinhala'nuOaftiti tt""gtn"t' died
than religion not only for
language had become mor- important
This
leaders but also for the nasses'
the

western-.d"JJsil;a

70

Linguistic Identity and Growth oflanguage

consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

shift of focus from religion to language

was an important
development that paved the *uy fo,
tt" emergence of language

movements.

Conclusion

This paper has set out some of the links

between
philological

work and the growth of linguistic consciousness

in
the early decades of the twentieth century.
As I have shown, the
politicization of the philologicar and
hisiorical schorarship gurr.
an irnpetus to the consciousniss of
own ringuistic ioentiiv arfuiate,

transformed it into a popular u*u..n"r,

about tuoguu;.. it.
linguistic identity of Sinhara as an Aryan
ranguage i,o ipit. or
borrowings from Thmil) and Tamil as
a Dravidian

that time. We also noticed how racial

theoriJs

Retigious (Basingtoke:
John E. Joseph, Language and ldentity: National, Ethnic,
Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), P'224'

name for the major

Robert caldwell was the first to use 'Dravidian' as the generic
in the Indian sub-continent'
spoken
was
which
Indo-Aryan,
to
next
family,
language
s"Jn"i. Robert caldwell , AComparative Grammar ofthe Dravidian or south Indian
ed' 1875'reprint'1961)'
FamilyofLangucges (Madras: MadrasUniversityPress' 2 'd

language in the shaping

For a discussion about the important role played by the Tamil
and Dravidian
Renaissance
Tamil
of Dravidian ideology, see K.N' Arooran ,
Nationalism, 1905-1944 ( Madurai: Koodal Publishers' 1980)'

;;;;;g"

aTLiii,
u"oiioguirii.

uniqueness oftheir own ranguage; local

intellectuars soon became
involved in language-related issue.. The
years from 1920s_1940s
show a steady increase in the growth
ofnationarist r"eringtrrrorgr,
of language, and a more general understandi"n;

character of Sinhala. for U"ottr ethnic grorpr,'figrug"

"i,il.
"link with the glorious past,,and also
aI
u;.;,-;iil,
diffirsion of nationar sentiment. "T; It i,
uguinrt this background that
we can notice the emergence of language
activists inlerested in
'p:..1t1,' and uniqueness of the
Si;ha; language, and of the
politicization

-;

of language awareness.

8 See R.A.L.H.

;;6il;;t#,

Gunawardana,'The People ofthe

r0

See James De Alwis ,

of
of

see R'A' Ariyaratne, 'communar.c_onllict

in ceylon poritics and the Advance towards
Self-Government

1917_1932, (phD dissertati"i,

U"i*^i

"f

Cambridge, 1973).

Lion'p' 26'

The Sidat Sangordva , A Grammar of the Sinhalese Language'

(Colombo:
Translated into English with Intioduction' Notes and Appendices
Government Pinter,

rhi' is a slightly revised,version ofa chapter ofmy phD

dissertation (The politics
Language in Colonial S^.i^L^*!u,
laS; submitted to the Universitv
Cambridge, uK in April 20og. r would
".tlOO_f
rikeio
have received from my supervisor
"-"'r.""rrl"ag",r,"
Dr. Sujit SiuuruoJar"rn
.

and
Gunawardana 'The People of the Lion: The Sinhala ldentity

IdeologinHistoryandHistoriography'SriLankaJouranlofHumanities{SIJH\
in the British
Vol. V;(l&2), 1979' pp.l-36 ; loft" O' Rogers, Flistorical images
of ConJlict
the
Roots
and
History
Sri
Lanka:
(ed.)
period; in: Jonathan Sperrcer
Dagnrar Hellmann-Rajanayagam' 'The
pp.
87-106;
1990)
Londoq
iRoutledge:
politics ofthe Tamil past'in: Jonathan Spencer (ed.) sri Lanka: History.and the
Roots ofConflict, PP. lO7-122.

?e

End Notes

'Cultural and Linguistic Consciousness ofthe Tamil CommunityZ

(Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 2006)'

lle
Tedjum
linguistic

acted as a

See K. Kailasapathy,

Association,
Ethnicity andiocial Change in Sri Laika (Colombo: Social Scientists
language history
f9a+; pp. 107'120. In aiecent book Trautmann has shown how
becameanindexofthehistoryofnationsinthelightofthe..Dravidianproof'''Thomas
Madras
R. Trautmann, Languages ind Nations' The Dravidian Proof in Colonial

of

scholarship came together.in the earry

""d
twentieth century.
paved the way for nationalists
to claim the antiquity

7l

3SeeK.N.O.Dharmadasa,Language,ReligionandEthnicAssertiveness:TheGrowth
University Press, 1992).
of sinhatese Nationalism in sri Larl.o lAtrttAtbor: Michigan

language

exacerbated these language controversies

among the scholars

New Seies Vol. LV

Smdagomi CoPerahewa

1852),

P.

xviii'

and Historical
K.N.O. Dharmadasa, " The People ofthe Lion": Ethnic ldentity, Ideology
of4umanities Vol' XV
Revisionism in Contemporary-Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka Journal
I &2, 1989 , P. 35'

l2MichaelRoberts,.LanguageandNationalldentity:TheSinhaleseandOthersover
the Centuries ' Nation;hs;andEthnic Politics Yol.9(2)2003,pp.75'102 ,Sinhala
(Colombo: vijitha Yapa
consciousness in the Kandyan Period, 1590s to 1815
Publications, 2003)

13

See W.P. Ranesinghe, The Sinhalese

Government Printer, 1900).

Language:

Its

Origin and Structure (Colombo:

aa

Linguistic Identity and Growth ofLanguage consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

Smdagomi Coperahewa

t4

In this period the Sinhalese nationalists used the word jdtiyd (meaning their own
kind) in order to denote Sinhala collectivity; and indeed piyadasa Sirisena started a
popular Sinhala joumal (and later a newspaper) with the title of Sinhala Jdtiya.

ie

Ramanathan
Quoted in M. Vythilingam, The Life of Sir Ponnambalam
(Chunnnakam: Thirumakkal Press, 1977), p.540'

30

Hellmann-Rajanayagam, 'The Politics ofthe Tamil Past ', p'114'

3r

Hellmann-Rajanayagam, ArumukaNavalar: Religious reformer'

32

C. Rasanayagam, Ancient Jafna (Nevt Delhi: Asian Educational services, [first

published: 19261 reprint 1984) p. 177.

33

Rasanayagam, The Tamil Kingdom of Jaffna, p.31. See also remarks by A. Mendis
Gunasekara to the above article, .,/MSCB No.75 ' 1922,p'56'

Sinhala Bauddhaya,2 March 1912. lt is worth noting here, during the nineteenth
century Swami Dayanand - the founder of the Arya Samaj in India gave the name
Arya Bhashato the Hindi language.
See Piyadasa Sirisena, Jayatissa hd Rosalin hevat VAsandvantta

l4vdhaya (Colombo:

1906).
t1

consider the following important personalities: Prof. Gunapala piyasena Malalasekera,

Prof. Ediriweera Sarathchandra ( E.R. De Silva).

3a
See Murugar Gunasingam, Sri Lankan Tamil Nationalism: A Study of its Origins
(Sydeney: MV Publications, 1999).

Ilam

35

Kailasapathy, 'Cultural and Linguistic Consciousness of the Tamil Community'p.

for 1923 (Education) .

Translated and cited in xavier s. Thani Nayagam 'Regional Nationalism in Twentieth

Century Tamil Literature' Tamil Cuhure,l963 (Jan- March) p. l.

35

Gunasingam,

37

Sri

Lankan Tamil Nationalism'

sociolinguist Joshua Fishman argues that language can often be the most salient symbol

gfethnicity because it both carries the past and expresses present and future attitudes
and aspirations. Joshua A. Fishmaq 'Language and Ethnicity 'in: Howard Giles
(ed.) ianguage, Ethnicly and Intergroup Relations (London: Academic Press' 1977)
pp. I 5-56.

3s

see Stevan Kemper, The Presence ofthe Past: chronicles, Politics and culture in
Sinhala Life (Ithaca: Comell University Press' l99l).

3e

R.A.L.H. Gunawardana, Historiography in a Time of Ethnic conJlict: Construction

ofthe Past in contemporary sri Lanka , (colombo: social Scientists 'Association,

by S.R. Muttukumaru Mudaliyar from Batticaloa on the Thmil language,

See articles

in

TamilLexicon. \,trol.I(I),(Madras:Diocesan

389-395.

Hindu Organ l-7-1918.

Administration Report

See

il,

K.M. De Silva, A History of sri Lanka (Delhi: oxford university Press, 1981), pp

ll5

The

<pali, Sfhala<Simhala.

1'/ol

Press, 1925) p. 382.

See Dagamar Hellmann-Rajanayagum, 'Arumuka Navalar: Religious reformer or

national leader of Eelam' lESI/R,Vol. 26, 2 (1989), p.243; S.Ranajeevan H.Hoole.

'The Tamils: The Problem ofldentity and Religion' Indian Church History Review
Vol. XX\i 2 l99l pp. 88-135.

73

New Seies Vol. LV

I99s)p.10.

TheNationalMonthly of Ceylon, Sep-Oct. 1917.

ao wilhelm Geiger,
Hellmann-Rajanayagam, Arumuka Navalar: Religious reform e1 p. 250.

C.Rasanayaganl 'The Tamil Kingdom of Jaffna and the Early Greek writers ' Journal

4r

of the RoyalAsiatic Society Ceylon Branch (JMSCB ) Vol)O<Dl no.75. 1922,

pp.l7- 54.

12

The Hindu

Organ, 7-5-1928.

See Kailasapathy,

pp. 115-116.

Cultural and Linguistic Consciousness of the Tamil Community,

a3

.4 Grammar of the sinhalese Language (colombo: Govemment

Press, 1938), p.

S.A. Pakeman,

Ceylon (London: Ernest Benn Limited, 1964) p'

ll3'

joint
H.C.P. Bell edited the JMSCB from 1881 to 1914. From 1915 to 1916 he was
Register
Literary
and
Antiquary
ceylon
The
of
senaveratne
editor with John M.
(CALR).
Such individuals were: w.P.Ranesinghe, simon de Silva, Abraham Mendis

Gunasekara, w.F.Gunawardhana, Anagarika Dharmapala, valising ha Harischan&a,

and Piyadasa Sirisena. see valisingha Harischandra's book Puravidydva (colombo:
W.E. Bastian, 19l2).

74

Linguistic Identity and Growth ofLanguage Consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidian Debate,

As Gunawardana has noted "linguistic groups were being given new definitions in
terms ofphysical characteristics which were supposed to be specific to those groups.
The Sinhala and Tamil identities acquired thereby a racial dimension." Gunawardana,
'The People ofthe Lion 'p.31.

ln

1922, Rev. Suriyagoda Sumangala, a graduate

appointed as the lecturer

ofthe University ofOxford, was

and in 1927, Dr.

in Sanskrit, Pali and Sinhala,

G.P.Malalasekera, a prominent Buddhist leader and oriental scholar also held that
position. See Administration Report of the Principal, University College - 1927 .

JMSCB

Vol.)OC( , 1925, pp.65-69 .In this same address

Clementi pointed out the necessity of an etymological dictionary for the Sinhala
language in orderto understandthe historical origin ofwords.
Presidential Address,

The C eylon H er ald, edilorial, 3 l - 10-1934.

Jayatilaka was a member of the Academic Committee of the University of College.

- 1922 (Principal, University College).

C eylon

D.B. Jayatilaka, A Dictionary of the Sinhalese Language Vol.l (Part 1) (Colombo:

Royal Asi:rtic Society Ceylon Branch, 1935). Introduction.
Ibid. p.xvii.

l3-17.

6!

Vol' Iv ([I) l92l' pp'

M.H.Kantawala, 'sinhalese and the Aryan Langaages'cALR
1922'pp'226-229'
VII(N)
Vot'
140;
137(IIf
1922,pp'
105 -107; Vol.VII

63 lbid, Vol. Vil(V)

James De

Alwis, 'On the origin of the Sinhalese Langaage' JMSCB 1867-70 Part I,

) p.1.

Ibid. pp.7-8.
In 1891, A.M. Gunasekara in his grammar ofthe Sinhala language gave a list of some
four hundred Tamil words embodied into Sinhal a. A Comprehensive Grammar ofthe
Sinhalese Langudge (Colombo: Government Press, l89l), pp . 356'368'
Jayatilaka, A Dictionary of the Sinhalese Language, p.xrtli.
W.F.Gunawardhan4'TheAryan Question in Relation to India'JRlSC4 Vol.
(74) , r92t pp.55-59.

JMSCB Yol'

1922, P' 229'

VIII (IID 1923,p'

w.F. Gunawardhana, ARejoinderto M. H. Kantawala'cALR\'lol.
201.

Rev.S.GnanaPrakasar'Place

ofTamil inthe Science oflangrage"/MSCB

Vol')oo(

No.80. 1927,P.427.

See Rev. S.Gnana Prakasar, 'The Dravidian Element

in sinhalese'JfilscB Vol'

sinhalese
'The Indian Languages and their Relation with the
p' 124'
1935'
I-IV
(88)
Parts
Vo|.)OO(II,
Langtage'JMSCB

67 R. Siddharatha,
68

lbid. p.150.

6e

Jayatilaka, Dictionary ofthe Sinhalese Lang448e' pp'xviii'xix'

)O(V[I,

(90)
'The Linguistic character of sinhalese'JR 4SCB Vol')ocKIV

1937, P.18.

?1 Wilhelm Geiger, A Grammar

Press, 1938),

See Ibid.

t7

to India"
A.Mendis Gunasekara, " The Aryan Question in Relation
)O(VIII, No.74 -1921 PP.6l-64

?0 wilhelm Geiger,

For a summary of these issues, see M.W.S. De Silva, Sinhalese and other island
Ianguages in SouthAsia, Ars linguistica; 3 (Tubingen: Cumter Narr Verlag 1979)

(la

6r

and 2000 copies were

This book was published at the Vidyasigara Press in Colombo
1924'
Book
Blue
Ceylon
for
The
See
circulated.

)OOflII, no.89'1936, PP' 233-253'

Kiribamune, 'Geiger and the History of Sri Lanka'C/f/SE New Series, Vol. VII,
(l) I977(Published in 1979), p.49.

pp.

N.J.Cooray, 192$, p'13'

w.F. Gunawardhana, siddhanta Partkshnaya (colombo:

Independent, 16 December 1895.

S.

JI

60

65

AR

New Seies Vol. LV

Smdagomi CoPerahewa

of the Sinhalese Language (Colombo: Government

xv.

?2

Literary Register'
Mainly to the Times of ceylon andlhe ceylon Antiquary and

1t

SwardjYa,l924-08-10.

7a

Gunasena, 1932)
Theodore G. Perera, sinhala Bhdshdva (colombo: M.D.

7j

Gieger pointed out:

p'ix'

..We must rather try to trace the Dravidian inlluence in grammar

-d-.tyl.,andlshouldmyselfbeverygladifacompetentstudentofDravidianwould
the Sinhalese Language' p' vi'
undertake this important iask." ceiiei' 'l Grammar of

pp lg-21'

75

Gunawardhanl, Siddhantu Parikshanaya,

77

Debates,state Council ofCeylon, 1934,p' 833'

76
7a

Linguistic Identity md Growth ofLanguage consciousness: Indo Aryan vs Dravidim Debate,

See JoshuaA. Fishman, Language andNationalism: Two IntegrativeEssays (Rowley:
Mass.,: Newbury 1973).

The end ofthe 1930s witnessed the emergence ofthe Hela movement led by Munidasa
Cumaratunga ( I 887 - 19 4 4).