Languages of India • Hacker News Board

Re: Languages of India

#131

Post by karthikvellanki » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:05 PM UTC

_iyig wrote: post #128

A co-worker of mine once said then he heard a greater variety of spoken Indian languages in the Bay Area than he’d ever heard back in India, where he was born and educated. Never thought of a polite way to ask, but I’ve always been curious as to how many Indian co-workers of mine share a language other than English - seems like the number could be lower than expected, given the sheer amount of different languages.

Your co-worker's observation is actually more obvious than we think it is.

Since states in India are essentially divided based on linguistic grounds, he would have been exposed to two Indian languages at best - the regional language in his town and Hindi (if the dominant language in the town is not Hindi already).

In the Bay Area you'll find people from various states of India.

Re: Languages of India

#132

Post by random314 » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:06 PM UTC

yumraj wrote: post #123

u801e wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed that some words have different pronunciations. For instance, the word for "definitely" is pronounced zaroor in Urdu but in Hindi, it's pronounced jaroor.

Jaroor/zaroor is Urdu word. Hindi is निश्चित (nishchit). Just because zaroor is commonly used doesn't make it Hindi.

Noone uses the so called text book Hindi on the street. Text book Hindi was introduced as a way to eliminate Persian words from Hindi about 100 years ago. So far text book Hindi has stayed strictly inside text books and dramas. Zaroor is indeed a Hindi word of Persian origin. Just like zeher, as opposed to Vish - which can only be found in text books.

Re: Languages of India

#133

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:10 PM UTC

sridca wrote: post #94

shripadk wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> impose Hindi on all states This is so blatantly false. I am from South and a Kannadiga and I can tell you with conviction that in my lifetime I have never had anyone impose Hindi on me. This frenzy of Hindi imposition exists only in the states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala (and a little in Karnataka but has since died down once people became more aware). I blame the excessive regionalism in part but major part of the bl…

> Indian identity was split right in the middle and was done on religious lines Religion is only one factor. People also derive their group identity along cultural, caste and social lines. This is not specific to India. Although religion is less emphasized in America, other factors (cultural, social, racial, economical, etc.) still continue play its role in forming the identity of its denizens. -- Response to below c…

Sigh! I can't believe someone will have such a big problem understanding such a simple thing. I have a feeling you are deliberately nitpicking my comments just to prove some non-existent point. I don't understand why you think I have no idea about what "identity" means. That is besides the point mate. I never spoke about "identity" by itself or the definition of "identity". I spoke about Indian identity being divided on religious lines.

Since you are finding it so difficult to understand, I'll make it even simpler for you. Let me take your own definition of identity and explain my statement:

You stated a few factors for "identity" right? Namely: Vocational Identity, National Identity, Racial Identity, Religious Identity, Ideological Identity, Political Identity, Family Identity, Gender Identity etc etc.

Now can we just say that all the above identities reasonably define the Indian identity? If yes, then out of all those identities, only the "religious identity" was used as a tool to split Indian identity. What was once a homogenous Indian identity was split into a Pakistani identity, a Bangladeshi identity and a smaller Indian identity. Each of these are now independent identities.

> Generally, the political distinction of states, as you repeatedly bring here, has no relevance whatsover to the subject of identity which, as stated above, can be based on several factors (not just religion). Just to state a few (in general terms, for the benefit of non-Indian readers)

You are so wrong here. The creation of States was done on linguistic/ethnic/regional lines. It is not "political distinction" but a "linguistic/ethnic/regional distinction". If you do not understand that basic thing about India then you are doing a big disservice to not just yourself but to also those who will be reading your comment mate.

Re: Languages of India

#134

Post by random314 » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:13 PM UTC

KorematsuFred wrote: post #125

aatharuv wrote: post #14

India's definition of what is and what is not a language is highly politicized and highly idiosyncratic. Hindi and Urdu, by any reasonable linguistic definition are not separate languages. The official standards for both Hindi and Urdu, are both based on the form of the huge dialect continuum that spans North India and Pakistan, as spoken in Delhi. The only difference is that Urdu uses Persian and Arabic as inspirati…

> Hindi and Urdu, by any reasonable linguistic definition are not separate languages. For any non-Indian person reading this, please note that this statement is 100% false. I am an outsider to Hindi speaking and Urdu speaking region. I have no dog in any political fight here but I have studied Hindi all my academic life and can assuredly tell you this statement is utter rubbish. But this might not be a fault of OP. A…

You are 100% wrong. The Bollywood Hindi is actually the real Hindi. It's not a mix of 2 languages. It's just one language - Hindi. Just like Hollywood English is simply English. The Hindi that is taught in text books in India is an artificial Hindi constructed 100 years ago by replacing Hindi words of Persian origin with words rooted in Sanskrit. So far this artificial language has stayed inside text books. If you actually speak text book artificial Hindi on the street, people will think you are crazy

Which part of India wouldn't you say

"Zara kitaab dena"

Instead of text book artificial

"Kripaya pustak Dena"

Re: Languages of India

#135

Post by jfk13 » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:16 PM UTC

owaislone wrote: post #130

jfk13 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Hindi script is easier for a foreign learner to deal with, because it more accurately maps to the phonemes of the language. So it's possible to "sound out" an unknown Hindi word from the written form, and get it fairly close to correct. With the Urdu script, this is more difficult, as many of the vowels are left unwritten or under-differentiated. (For a trivial example, is اس the word /ɪs/ "this" or /ʊs/ "that"?…

> Urdu script can distinguish them, by adding a diacritic to the ا, but it's usually omitted Not in my experience and certainly not as a student. I'm not an expert but at my school اس for something that sounds exactly as /ɪs/ would be considered completely invalid. Only اِس would be considered correct. Actually, I think اِز (more like iz) might be more correct phonetically.

In school, perhaps so. But looking at something like https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/اردو, there's scarcely more than a handful of short vowel marks (zabar, zer, pesh, or fatha, kasra, damma as an Arabic speaker would call them) anywhere on the page; the vast majority are left unwritten.

Re: Languages of India

#136

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:16 PM UTC

sridca wrote: post #91

shripadk wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is because several fellow south Indians gave up their lives to ensure that north Indian language bigots would not have their way. I know everything about these agitations. There is a huge difference between what happened in 1940s and what is happening today. You are just extrapolating your fears needlessly. When I talk about "my lifetime" I talk about 30 years of my life. I was not born in the 1940s so there i…

I never understood the sensibility of the notion of imposing Hindi to others in the country. It is like say Germany imposing German to be the de facto language all across Europe! And I do appreciate that we have one common language, English, which is tremendously useful in practical sense (not even including politics in here). -- I'm going to post my response here as HN moderators have put a limit on my account (I th…

> Given that not everyone sees the issue of, for instance, being forced to learn a language in political sense like you, then telling them not to give their perspective on this matter is rather myopic.

You know what? I am done arguing with you over this silly issue. I am not asking you to not give a perspective. I am saying your perspective is flawed from the very start. Instead give a valid perspective that I can accept. I am a Kannadiga. If I can accept Hindi and enjoy the language without any sort of prejudice anyone can. There is no justification for the hatred being shown to Hindi apart from regional linguistic pride. Nothing you say will change my opinion on that. You have an ego that is coming in the way of learning/appreciating the language that is all. It has a tinge of racism.

> What has that got to do with not having to learn another language when both parties can understand and speak English?

But how many of you practice what you preach mate? I wouldn't mind if English was actually spoken by everyone. It is not the case. At least if I go to the North they attempt in some broken way to communicate in English. But in more "literate" states I find it hard to find people who converse in English. If you do not believe me, just take a non-Tamilian/non-Malayali friend to Tamil Nadu or Kerala and ask them to find their way around and just observe how the locals interact. Do this as a social experiment and see for yourself!

Re: Languages of India

#137

Post by random314 » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:18 PM UTC

yumraj wrote: post #121

aatharuv wrote: post #14

India's definition of what is and what is not a language is highly politicized and highly idiosyncratic. Hindi and Urdu, by any reasonable linguistic definition are not separate languages. The official standards for both Hindi and Urdu, are both based on the form of the huge dialect continuum that spans North India and Pakistan, as spoken in Delhi. The only difference is that Urdu uses Persian and Arabic as inspirati…

> Hindi and Urdu, by any reasonable linguistic definition are not separate languages. That is a common misconception. You are confusing colloquial Hindi and colloquial Urdu with the pure Hindi and pure Urdu. Pick a word, any word and there is Hindi equivalent and there is a Urdu equivalent. Just because the spoken Hindi, primarily in India, uses a mixture doesn't make them same or even similar.

I have replied elsewhere, but you are wrong.

Re: Languages of India

#138

Post by mshaler » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:27 PM UTC

"The difference between a language and a dialect is an army and a navy." Of course this is all politicized, therefore sometimes militarized...

Re: Languages of India

#139

Post by owaislone » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:29 PM UTC

jfk13 wrote: post #135

owaislone wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Urdu script can distinguish them, by adding a diacritic to the ا, but it's usually omitted Not in my experience and certainly not as a student. I'm not an expert but at my school اس for something that sounds exactly as /ɪs/ would be considered completely invalid. Only اِس would be considered correct. Actually, I think اِز (more like iz) might be more correct phonetically.

In school, perhaps so. But looking at something like https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/اردو , there's scarcely more than a handful of short vowel marks ( zabar , zer , pesh , or fatha , kasra , damma as an Arabic speaker would call them) anywhere on the page; the vast majority are left unwritten.

While I'm not 100% sure, I think it _might_ be the case of writing Urdu online vs on paper. I'll try to grab an Urdu book or newspaper tomorrow and see how it is written. Thanks for the insight, this was very interesting.

Re: Languages of India

#140

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jun 05, 2019, 10:35 PM UTC

sridca wrote: post #91

shripadk wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is because several fellow south Indians gave up their lives to ensure that north Indian language bigots would not have their way. I know everything about these agitations. There is a huge difference between what happened in 1940s and what is happening today. You are just extrapolating your fears needlessly. When I talk about "my lifetime" I talk about 30 years of my life. I was not born in the 1940s so there i…

I never understood the sensibility of the notion of imposing Hindi to others in the country. It is like say Germany imposing German to be the de facto language all across Europe! And I do appreciate that we have one common language, English, which is tremendously useful in practical sense (not even including politics in here). -- I'm going to post my response here as HN moderators have put a limit on my account (I th…

> It seems you are making a big issue out of language learning, which is more of a practical matter, such as taking not being able to fully comprehend a local's driving directions to be discrimination. It might pay you to explore this issue (a commenter here called it "baggage") within you.

You know when you start saying stuff like 'a commenter here called it "baggage"' it sounds like those fascist dictators who couldn't say "me" or "I" but would in a convoluted manner refer to themselves in third-person. You can throw away that ego you have in the bin where it belongs and just say "I said I have no baggage".

> not being able to fully comprehend a local's driving directions to be discrimination.

You have a huge difficulty in comprehending the simple English that I am speaking. Where did I say we had difficulty comprehending local's driving directions? We caught the locals giving wrong directions because I understand and speak Tamil. So I knew that they were fooling us and when I spoke in Tamil they giggled and gave the right directions. If you are going to justify this sort of maliciousness with your logics then go ahead. You are only doing a great disservice to your people.

> Everybody is racist/classist/casteist/etc. to an extent. Do you see that in yourself as well (in regards to your driver not being able to comprehend the driving directions given by a local)? If so you might well be on your way to understanding what the word "identity" means ... B-)

I see you have absolutely zero comprehension skills because you thought my driver could not comprehend when I clearly mentioned that the local gave the wrong directions and he was caught red-handed. You are prejudiced, a racist and couple that with ego and we now have a recipe for disaster.