4 ms·
> - Iyengar is not of Sanskrit origin. On the other hand the unambiguously Dalit surname Chamar is. You are cherry-picking examples from my list to prove a poi
by delta_p_delta_x 4y ago
> - Iyengar is not of Sanskrit origin. On the other hand the unambiguously Dalit surname Chamar is.
You are cherry-picking examples from my list to prove a point.
Furthermore, the etymology of 'Iyengar' is contested, and possibly cognate to the Sanskrit 'ārya'.
Perhaps I should clarify: there are always exceptions to the rule. However, I resolutely assert that Sanskrit-derived first and last names are markers of upper-caste ancestry. Yes, there are people of lower-caste with Sanskrit-derived names, and there are people with Dravidian/tribal names from so-called higher castes. That said, the latter is a highly unlikely combination.
- unmole 4y ago> You are cherry-picking examples from my list to prove a point. I am pointing out that the generalizations you made don't even hold in the small examples that you came up with. > I resolutely assert that Sanskrit-derived first and last names are markers of upper-caste ancestry. and > there are people of lower-caste with Sanskrit-derived names These both can't be true. > Dravidian/tribal names I don't understand this bizzare conflation of Dravidian with tribal. What does tribal even mean in this context?