Live data from Hacker News

The Death of the Urdu Script

medium.com

131–140 of 141 posts

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#131
In the 1960s, the Government of Pakistan tried to make naskh common in order to facilitate mechanization of printing. In order to do so, naskh was introduced in schools so that children get used to it from an early age. Some books started appearing in naskh. The daily newspaper Nawa-i-waqt started printing its second page in naskh. It was very unfortunate for Urdu that these efforts failed. The reason was simple. Instead of requiring that the textbooks be typeset in naskh, they continued to be handwritten, albeit in naskh-like script. Gradually after a few years that naskh started resembling nasta’aliq more and more and eventually all traces of naskh disappeared. This, to mind, was the greatest setback suffered by the Urdu language printing.

Let me explain why I call it the greatest setback. Urdu books and newspapers were written by hand and then lithographed. The process was slow, mistakes were plentiful, dots above and below letters were misplaced, letters such as daal and waaw were indistinct from each other, and many times the printing was illegible. Please try to read a book produced by that method, and then compare it to the same book typeset in naskh; you will note the difference. I have a copy of Divan-e-Hafiz published in nasta’aliq in the subcontinent, and another copy in naskh published in Iran. The difference in the clarity of text in the two is phenomenal.

This abortive attempt in 1960s to switch to naskh had nothing to do with religion or Arabization. Ayub Khan, in whose time the effort started, can hardly be accused of religion-inspired initiatives. It was simply to promote mechanized printing. If anything, later the religion-enthusiast Zia-ul-Haq did nothing to popularize naskh. Ironically, computer has saved nasta’aliq, since software is now commonly available which is now universally used to compose material for printing. But naskh is still clearer to read, and in my opinion it is not too late to give it another try, and use naskh, while reserving nasta’aliq for calligraphy. Undoubtedly nasta’aliq is elegant and no script can match its beauty.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#132
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I detest this view. Typical navel gazing, utility-uber-alles (at least for things that "I" am not interested in) programmer who is more concerned with some kind of compatibility (of course using IT examples) than anything else. Even if we only strictly consider languages themselves, what if some people find pleasure in them? You can't say that what they enjoy doing is wrong with some argument for its utility - becaus…

Why preserve culture? You answer still comes down to "because we can't lose it". The other side of the coin is it's being done at the expense of forcing all minority language speakers to be economically disadvantaged. Great news if you're an American, not so great if you're a Nepalese. I have to disagree with you there. You haven't shown any reason why a member of a minority culture should be excluded from most of so…

> Why preserve culture? You answer still comes down to "because we can't lose it".

Why have cultures? Because it increases the diversity of thought and ideas. This diversity in turn can inspire each other and create new impulses, ideas, ways of thinking. This diversity is severely limited - and in turn how much it can influence and inspire other cultures - if they simply disappear. It's like taking all the work and time it took, for perhaps thousands of years, to create that culture, and simply destroying it.

Another reason is that I think that it's a shame for majority, dominant cultures to simply swallow up minority cultures. If the people of that minority culture want to preserve it, I think they should stand a chance.

Lastly, I think it's a worthy end onto itself. This is the end-road of socratic reasoning. Would you say that it is frivolous to just say "because it is worthy in itself"? Well, this is how all arguments end up, anyway. Just like your argument might end up with the assumption that "convenience and less struggle to communicate is worthy in itself". But then I can say, "a little struggle and inconvenience in communication is part of the fun! We should preserve our differences for that reason".

> The other side of the coin is it's being done at the expense of forcing all minority language speakers to be economically disadvantaged. Great news if you're an American, not so great if you're a Nepalese. I have to disagree with you there. You haven't shown any reason why a member of a minority culture should be excluded from most of society and prevented from even learning modern knowledge, reading literature, or even understanding the ways of thinking of most of the world.

Nonsense. Do you know how many people speak two, three and so on languages? How many people who speak a minority language in some country, also speak some majority language? The same goes for speaking a native, minority, or whatever language, and speaking English (or perhaps French or Portuguese etc., depending on where they are in the world).

I have to emphasize that I would never condone forcing people to practice and learn a language. It should be by their own volition. If they don't want to practice it, then that is of course entirely up to them. Just as I wouldn't force them or encourage them to give up their language (and perhaps in turn also their culture) in favour of some international standard language.

> This is why I favor storing languages in museums, rather than burdening millions of innocent people with the job they didn't even sign up for.

Is that so.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#133
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although Antiqua is used almost ubiquitously in Germany, Fraktur still has its proponents in Germany (mainly among older people). Just to give one reason, which I consider as pretty convincing: Fraktur has two different small s (long s and round s) > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraktur_%28Schrift%29#mediaview... while Antiqua only has one. Since in German combinations of st, sp are pronounced differently and in Germ…

You could still write Wachſtube and Wachstube. Long s (ſ) could be made available in any script, and the fact that it isn't maybe tells that it is not such a big problem.

There are additional rules for non-optional ligatures hinting the pronunciation which sometimes must be used and sometimes must not; see my post at

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7944134

Indeed your argument shows that long s and pronunciation-hinting ligatures are not strictly necessary. But neither are high-level languages for programming (you could code anything, say in C or assembler). Nevertheless most programmers prefer using higher-level languages over C or assembler, because they implement desirable features. So why not use a writing system which already implements such nice features by construction?

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#134
post #18

its an interesting read and I acknowledge the intent to keep the traditional and authentic writing system for Urdu. I have a few thoughts on this though. One would be the legibility. Of course I cannot judge legibility of writing systems I do not like, but it seems that nastaliq would be hardly readable on a lot of mobile devices and I wonder how difficult learning the ornate script is. I am talking about alphabetiza…

A note about Fraktur: Even though the wiki article states that the main reason for its downfall was the Nazis forbidding it themselves, as a native German speaker I quite strongly feel it to be associated with Nazi culture - which immediately renders it impossible to use in any context, since you want to be as far from that as you can. Allergic reaction to anything resembling Nazi symbolism is quite strong in German…

As a native German I rather feel it associated with the German Empire - probably also not a desirable association (read "Der Untertan" by Heinrich Mann (in English this book seems to be known under different names: "Man of Straw", "The Patrioteer", "The Loyal Subject")), but it has nothing to do with nazis.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially around Lucknow, there are certainly vocabulary differences, and some very minor grammatical ones (matching numbers in verbal phrases, some nouns changing gender, but overall yes, I see your point). I would be interested in your opinion of what Kamleshwar's novel Kitne Pakistan was written in or Munshi Premchand's early work published in Devanagari?

> I would be interested in your opinion of what Kamleshwar's novel Kitne Pakistan was written in or Munshi Premchand's early work published in Devanagari? You've exceeded the bounds of my knowledge, but I can provide some generalities. Writing systems can have no effect on the, um, "identity" of a language, since it's quite possible for people to be illiterate. So to me, saying something is written in Urdu, or saying…

Ok then, why do I regularly encounter Hindi words like "saphalta" and "viruddh" that I have never encountered written or spoken anywhere in the Pakistani mediasphere and have to resort to a dictionary for (when there are perfectly good 100% mutually intelligible equivalents "kamyabi" and "ke khilaf/mukhalif hona/rokna")

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would be interested in your opinion of what Kamleshwar's novel Kitne Pakistan was written in or Munshi Premchand's early work published in Devanagari? You've exceeded the bounds of my knowledge, but I can provide some generalities. Writing systems can have no effect on the, um, "identity" of a language, since it's quite possible for people to be illiterate. So to me, saying something is written in Urdu, or saying…

Ok then, why do I regularly encounter Hindi words like "saphalta" and "viruddh" that I have never encountered written or spoken anywhere in the Pakistani mediasphere and have to resort to a dictionary for (when there are perfectly good 100% mutually intelligible equivalents "kamyabi" and "ke khilaf/mukhalif hona/rokna")

You know, for my whole life people have been complaining to me that I use words they don't understand. Words like "quixotic", "propriety", and "fee schedule" (those aren't invented examples; they all happened recently enough for me to remember). They've never suggested that my vocabulary actually means I speak a different language, though.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#137
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly popular opinion seems to be that languages and other traditions must be preserved because, well, we can't lose them. It's certainly good to preserve them in museums so people can use them for research, etc. But there's little or no actual need for more than one language in the world, let along more than one writing system for the same language! People don't mourn the loss of codepage 437. For many people that's…

I think the concern is more the loss of literature written over the ages in a language. Equally importantly, language - as an extension of culture - shapes the way people think. Different people thinking differently is how problems can get solved, instead of monstrous uniformity you seem to be envisioning.

This doesn't make any sense. Ancient literature will be lost no matter how many languages the world holds at any time -- language change means that it isn't possible to understand ancient works. Sure, it's easier for an English speaker to pick up Old English than Ancient Egyptian, but both take years of effort.

> Different people thinking differently is how problems can get solved, instead of monstrous uniformity you seem to be envisioning

People think plenty differently while speaking the same language. They don't think any more differently if they speak different languages.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#138
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You write: "All of them come from Arabic (not just the letters, the scripts) as well, and as an Arabic speaker I find that attitude strange. I could be reading too much into it." I think that's where our disconnect lies and I do think you're reading too much into it. Urdu is not a child of Arabic. The word itself is Turkish, and the old story about Urdu's genesis is that it amalgamated during the military conquests o…

Its kind of like how the Anglicans would resent being declared Children of Catholicism. Sure, without revolting against the Church there would not Anglicanism, but that doesn't mean that an Anglican would like to be told, "you came from Catholicism." This doesn't touch your main point, but I don't think most Anglicans have trouble with the idea that it comes from Catholicism.

Very true, hence the term 'Anglo-Catholic':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Catholicism

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#139
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The analogy to open source projects is spot on Except that when an open source project dies, its code remains in full -- to study, take ideas from, or even potentially be revived at a later time. When a language dies though, it's pretty much gone. Even if it's received a lot of attention from field linguists, it's near impossible to fully codify the grammar and document the nuances of any language.

I doubt that a language dieing in 2014 would be completely gone from all record. Almost all the languages that we "lost" did not have a rich literature or sometimes even an alphabet.

There are plenty of extant languages that don't have an alphabet either. They will be "lost" in every sense of the word.

The # of languages currently spoken is typically pegged somewhere between 3000-6000 and it's thought that we lose around one a week. Most have almost no documentation whatsoever, and even so a couple papers written in the 1970s aren't going to capture any potential unique aspects of a language let alone allow for reconstruction at a later point.

The analogy to code is way off.

Re: The Death of the Urdu Script

#140
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is rather confusing. IIRC both Arial and Times New Roman let you express all 26 alphabets. Now if Naskh has Nastaleeq have differing number of characters, is this a mere font issue or is there something more fundamental differing between the two?

restalis, FYI you have been hellbanned, so no one can read your posts unless they are logged in and have "showdead" turned on.

I think it's because I've touched political matters in a post a while ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5166069
Post reply on HN