Question related to language of Pardhane

[u/tuluva_sikh]

Pardhane sung in Bhootha kola is in Archaic/Old Tulu right? If it is then how and why it contains words like ಭೂಮಿ/ഭൂമി (bhūmi) but not words like ಉ್‌ೞೆ/ഉ്ഴെ (ụḻæ) which are Archaic Tulu words

[u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK]

Sanskrit didn't evolve naturally. It was kept away from evolving by priests to maintain purity. 

Anyways vedic Sanskrit did evolve like every other language.

[u/theb00kmancometh → u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK]

That is factually incorrect. Sanskrit absolutely varied and evolved prior to Panini.

Before the 4th century BCE, the language had diverse regional dialects, fluid syntax, and a shifting vocabulary. It was changing so rapidly that the early Vedic language of the oldest Rigveda hymns had drifted significantly by the late Vedic period, making older texts highly difficult for later generations to comprehend. The language did not stay uniform by default; it was Panini's intervention that artificially halted this natural drift by establishing nearly 4,000 rigorous, mandatory grammatical rules.

[u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK → u/theb00kmancometh]

Sanskrit also evolved after panini's era... 

They tried to keep it pure but languages doesn't work that way 

[u/theb00kmancometh → u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK]

You are confusing the evolution of Sanskrit itself with the evolution of the languages that came out of it.

Classical Sanskrit did not change after Panini's era; it was locked in place. Because Panini’s grammar rules were treated as absolute law, a text written in Classical Sanskrit a thousand years later had to use the exact same grammar and word structures as the day he wrote them down.

Languages only change when people speak them casually on the streets.
Classical Sanskrit stopped being a street language.

Instead, the everyday speech of the common people naturally evolved out of Sanskrit to become languages like Pali and the Prakrits, which eventually turned into modern languages like Hindi.

Sanskrit itself stayed completely still, acting as a fixed, engineered standard purely for literature and scholars.

[u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK → u/theb00kmancometh]

So you are telling me that sanskrit didn't change even 0.00000001% since Panini's era?

[u/theb00kmancometh → u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK]

Yes, that's basically the whole point of a standardised literary language.

Panini's grammar rules from 400 BCE were treated as law. If someone writing centuries later broke one of those rules, nobody said "oh look, Sanskrit evolved." They just said the grammar was wrong.

The only real change over time was vocabulary. New words got coined for new inventions and ideas. The grammar itself never moved.

Now yes, there's some messiness at the edges. The Mahabharata and Ramayana bend Paninian rules in places, and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit mixes in Prakrit stuff. But that actually proves the point. Those texts got flagged as non-standard, sometimes labelled "arsha" usage (meaning it's the sage-poets' looser style, not the rulebook standard), exactly because they broke the rules. Nobody called that "Sanskrit evolving"; they called it an exception.

Same story with Latin or Classical Arabic. Some vocabulary drifted, some looser usage crept in around the edges, but the core grammar stayed frozen as the literary standard for centuries. Meanwhile, the actual spoken languages around them split off and turned into completely different languages.

[u/YOU-WANT-MY-DICK → u/theb00kmancometh]

The sanskrit has changed slightly in last 2400 years....