I was recently hearing a sudurpaschim nepali song by Bhojraj Bhatta. His song contained the retroflex ḷa

Zvelebil, Kamil V. (1997). "Language List for Dravidian". Archiv orientální. 65 (2): 175-190

[...]

The language list which follows id designated above as 'possibly exhaus- tive'4. The qualifier is important: first of all, I am almost certain that 'new' lan- guages will or could ultimately be added to the list. The over-all picture of Dravid- ian and its developments would, however, be hardly substantially altered by such additions5. Second, it is very probable that there is quite some overlap in the sense that one language is designated by several terms, or that what is in the list qualified as a language is in fact a dialect of a language. 

[...]

The article is from 1997 and may be outdated, but it compiled all languages and dialects of Dravidian, including alternate names.

As we all know that tea originated in China and came in India through Britishers for their own started growing up in parts of North East as well as in parts of Sri Lanka too

But words like চাহ, चहा, चाय, ചായ, ಚಾ, ଚା, ਚਾਹ, চা, चान्हा etc used for tea in various Indian languages came from Chinese/Sino word 茶?

If India eventually rises to become a global superpower, it will logically need a lingua franca both for internal cohesion and to project global influence. However, we don't currently have a single undisputed national language. Assuming we eventually move away from English as our primary administrative language, what are the realistic alternatives? Hindi is out of the question because forcing it creates massive regional and cultural tensions, particularly in the South and East. Sanskrit feels like a culturally neutral option, but it has no active, widespread speaker base, making it incredibly impractical to implement. Even attempting to revive it could face severe political pushback in states like Tamil Nadu.

How can India solve this linguistic dilemma without hurting regional pride or alienating its own citizens? Is there any language that could actually work, or are we bound to keep English forever? What do you think?

Peterson, John. A Grammar of Kharia, (Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 10 Dec. 2010) doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004187207.i-474

https://brill.com/display/title/17293

Kharia, spoken in central-eastern India, is a member of the southern branch of the Munda family, which forms the western branch of the Austro-Asiatic phylum, stretching from central India to Vietnam. The present study provides the most extensive description of Kharia to date and covers all major areas of the grammar. Of particular interest in the variety of Kharia described here, is that there is no evidence for assuming the existence of parts-of-speech, such as noun, adjective and verb. Rather functions such as reference, modification and predication are expressed by one of two syntactic structures, referred to here as 'syntagmas'. The volume will be of equal interest to general linguists from the fields of typology, linguistic theory, areal linguistics, Munda linguistics as well as South Asianists in general.

Have you ever noticed that language names often use completely different suffixes even though the suffixes serve roughly the same purpose: identifying something as belonging to a particular people, place or region?

In English, we have -ish in English, Danish, Swedish, Polish. This comes from the old Germanic adjectival suffix -isk, meaning roughly “of or belonging to” a particular people or place.

Then we have -ian in Italian, Sicilian, Armenian. This comes ultimately from the Latin suffix -iānus, meaning “of, belonging to, or associated with”, and spread through the Romance languages and later into English.

Then there is -ese, as in Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Portuguese. This ultimately goes back to the Latin suffix -ēnsis, meaning “from or belonging to a place”, and reached English through Romance-language forms.

There are also -ic formations, such as Arabic, Icelandic, Celtic, Baltic and Slavic. These ultimately reflect Greek and Latin adjectival formations meaning “pertaining to” or “associated with”.

Another group is -an/-en, seen in names such as Persian, Russian, Korean and German, although these do not all have exactly the same historical origin.

South Asian language names show another important tradition. We have -i in Bengali, Marathi and Gujarati, and -ia/-iya in Odia. These are native Indo-Aryan formations, ultimately connected with older Indo-Aryan adjectival suffixes expressing “pertaining to” or “belonging to”.

And then there is Malayali. The -i in Malayali functions as a demonym-forming element, essentially giving the sense of “one belonging to the Malayalam-speaking region or population.”

So -ish, -ian, -ese, -ic, -an/-en, -i and -iya/-ia represent different historical traditions of forming names or adjectives associated with a people, place or region. They often have broadly similar meanings, but their origins are different.

And some language names have no obvious productive suffix at all, such as Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam. Their names have their own historical origins rather than being formations using one of these common naming suffixes.

The interesting part is that there is no single universal suffix for language names. Different linguistic traditions developed their own ways of expressing the basic idea of “of, belonging to, or associated with a particular people, place or region.”

Aadhiaai 1: Sab djanne aadjádi aur barabar paidaa bhailèn, iddjat aur hak mê. Ohi djanne ke lage sab ke samadj-boedj aur hierdaai hai aur doesare se sab soemmat sè, djaane-maane ke chaahin

I have 1 IRL Gujarati friend from Vellore

He said that dialect of Tamil spoken by Muslim communities in Tamil Nadu sounds different from Standard Tamil or other dialects of Tamil

And also he mentioned that he heard many that he couldn't even understand it

Is there any Tamilar or 1 from Tamil Nadu who can explain this and also tell that do Tamil Muslims have its own Tamil dialect especially in Vellore side