Early Tamil Epigraphy: From the Earliest Times to the Sixth Century A.D. c26.s8.4

c26.s8.4

Since the use of the *puḷḷi* was optional in practice, the question arises whether there is any real difference between the TB-II and TB-III systems. Can we not explain the absence of the *puḷḷi* in the TB-II system by assuming it was 'implicit' as in medieval writing?¹ It is, however, most unlikely that originally an 'inherent' *-a* could have been cancelled by an 'implicit' *puḷḷi*. It seems necessary on theoretical considerations to postulate two stages, as the *puḷḷi* is clearly a response to the felt need to obviate the confusion in having to read the unmarked consonantal symbol either as basic or with the inherent *-a* as in the earlier system.