|
 |
Why isn’t Hindi a "popular" language? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| napoleon Tetraglot Senior Member India Joined 4828 days ago 543 posts - 874 votes  Speaks: Bengali*, English, Hindi, Urdu Studies: French, Arabic (Written) | Message 185 of 197 06 March 2014 at 9:01am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
By 1985, I presume you are referring to the anti-Sikh riots that happened when the then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, was assasinated by her Sikh bodyguards. Edit: I feel for my Punjabi brothers. The way the administration of Rajiv Gandhi bungled the situation in Delhi is criminal. The perpetrators went unpunished. Phoolka, the lawyer who fought for the victims in court, argues that this encouraged communalism leading to more riots in Gujarat and UP.
Every country is different. In the US, you have problems that manifest themselves along racial lines. The 2011 riots prove that the UK has similar issues. In India, our troubles often take on a communal colour. But it is naive to suggest that there was complete harmony among communities in India once and somehow there is no harmony today. Edited by napoleon on 06 March 2014 at 5:01pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Jeffers Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4721 days ago 2151 posts - 3960 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Hindi, Ancient Greek, French, Sanskrit, German | Message 186 of 197 06 March 2014 at 2:08pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I mentioned the 1984 riots because they affected even Mussoorie, which generally has
escaped communalism. (I got the year wrong in my post before). There is quite a huge difference in the type and scale of the rioting in India in comparison to the USA and the UK. The level and widespread extent of the violence is just not comparable. In 1984 Sikhs were the ones under attack. In 1991 (I believe) (EDIT it was 1992). there were riots between Muslims and Hindus all over India after the Babri Masjid was torn down. Both of these cases were widespread, and deadly to the people on the receiving end. The 1984 riots resulted in upward of 8,000 deaths. In 2002 there were riots mostly localised in Gujarat, between Muslims and Hindus, but mostly against Muslims. According to official numbers, "only" about 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus died. According to your link, 5 people died in the 2011 UK riots. The most famous recent race riots in the USA were the 1992 riots in Los Angeles. They were essentially confined to LA, and resulted in 58 deaths. That was considered one of the worst riots in the USA. There was other rioting in the 1960s and a bit in the 1970s, but I'm not old enough to remember them. My point is that comparing the UK and USA race riots to the communal problem in India is like comparing a cat to a tiger.
I think that's probably true. EDIT: Reading this over, it looks like I'm attacking India. In fact, I have been in riot areas in India during 1992 and 2002, and it was very scary even though I wouldn't have been targeted. I happened to be away for a few months in 1984, but I saw the aftermath. Nevertheless, most of the time I feel much safer in India than I do in the USA and UK. Edited by Jeffers on 06 March 2014 at 2:20pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Jeffers Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4721 days ago 2151 posts - 3960 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Hindi, Ancient Greek, French, Sanskrit, German | Message 187 of 197 06 March 2014 at 2:23pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
I was living in Mussoorie at the time. In fact, I'm pretty sure that summer I took Hindi lessons with Chitranjan Das himself (but probably in July). 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Luso Hexaglot Senior Member Portugal Joined 5873 days ago 819 posts - 1812 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, French, EnglishC2, GermanB1, Italian, Spanish Studies: Sanskrit, Arabic (classical) | Message 188 of 197 06 March 2014 at 3:21pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
The expression "tend to have" itself conveys the feeling of "not always", my friend. So, it's true. I like Orientalism. In fact, as a longtime learner of Arabic language and culture, this is one of the books you better read. You bring one very interesting point to the discussion, which is the value of propaganda: since immemorial times, portraying your opponent as barbaric and your actions as "civilising" has paid a lot of dividends, whether to your own people or to your rivals closer to home. The Romans were very good at this, for instance. The scrambles for America, Africa, Asia, etc., were just the same, elevated to an art form, unfortunately. We have many very current examples of such image-building, but I won't dignify them by pointing them out. Every new event brings a "there they are at it again". We just have to play our little part in dispelling them. 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Jeffers Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4721 days ago 2151 posts - 3960 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Hindi, Ancient Greek, French, Sanskrit, German | Message 189 of 197 06 March 2014 at 3:42pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
Very true. And right now Russia is in Ukraine for humanitarian purposes. Meanwhile, Europe is concerned about democracy, not the future price of gas, right? Ha! 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Lykeio Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4056 days ago 120 posts - 357 votes | Message 190 of 197 06 March 2014 at 4:32pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
You're right of course fellows that it adds but little, hence my reticence in writing a
thoughtful reply. Though that has more to do with the idiocy of the arguments put forth by Gemuse here. He tries to tell us that “Hindu” can be used in a civilisational sense and yet I'm to explain this to Jains and Sikhs (Muslims, Parsis, Jews, Adivasis etc too one supposes). Why not admit your usage was just wrong? If it was so self evident I wouldn't have to explain it to Indians would I? This is as moronic as the phrase that Sanskrit is a “Hindu language”. I think his comments are quite revealing though: apparently left wingers (that mythic anti-hindu phenomenon) is somehow depreciating Hindu culture (whatever that means). Serious riots are brushed aside (and by another poster subject to a pithy et tu quoque fallacy and some false equivalency as if the troubles in Lozelles were anything like the Gujurat riots!). What is very telling, however, and frankly offensive is the blithe assumption as to my background. “Go live in the country for a few years before spewing leftwing anti-Hindu propaganda.” How arrogant! To assume where I'm from or where my knowledge comes from! My own life experiences! Ignorant too to assume anyone who disagrees with you is somehow anti-Hindu or propagandistic or misinformed. Wow. So, yes, given this idiot I'm quite happy to refrain from continuing this discussion. I'll even bring the thread back on track by addressing the OP's question, largely synthesising things we've learnt in this thread but also opening up some stuff I've long been ruminating on but no one has brought up. Meanwhile maybe Gemuse can go back to http://www.reddit.com/r/bakchodi/ I think the question of “why isn't Hindi popular?” is basically asking the wrong kinds of question. Popular for who? India isn't a monolithic entity, why not start there? The problem is getting data in India is pretty damn difficult when it comes to language. Many people who speak not a word apparently will list their language as Hindi for political/religious reasons and Hindi is more a confluence of related dialectical features than a singular language. I'd be interested in seeing numbers for people using proper khari bholi though. Also the line between dialect/language in India is even more politicised as normal. Merwari has recently been re-classified as a dialect of Hindi rather than a language despite having undergone divergent phonological and morphological changes....several centuries ago. So are these Hindi speakers? Not in any meaningful sense. Statistics are useless, hence my asking other posters. That said there has been a spread of Hindi via Bollywood. I asked, a few pages back, at the influence of English medium education on the indigenous vernaculars. I'm glad of the responses but I really want to know is how much of Hindi's post Braj literary culture is being passed on? And how is Hindification hampering/helping this? Either way the Indians are learning Hindi and given the size of India that's non negligible. The other big grouping are the diaspora. The diaspora is weird. In the third, and in some cases fourth, generation in most places their families often left pre establishment of India. There's also a lot of commingling across case, religious, class and linguistic ties. So for example I know an X who has a Punjabi and Gujarati parent but speaks Hindi, another of Bengali descent who again learnt Hindi. Basically given this extreme confluence many are getting in touch with their roots not by learning their actual mother tongue (especially because their parents tend to be illiterate in them) but turning to Hindi given its perceived prestige and wealth of classes and materials. So, basically, I think Hindi is quite popular if you take a step back and not look at it through solely Western eyes. The natives and the diaspora are sizeable. I get that largely non Indians are meant but we need to bear all this in mind and most of the diaspora identify with India as the place of their (and their forebears) culture not as a nation state - there is a crucial difference, so they definitely count. I think very few Westerners learn Hindi due to India's reputation. Both the bad which people would rather avoid (and many, it seems, would like to pretend doesn't exist) and the fact that extensive familiarity with English tends to de-incentivize learning it. Many Indians seem to speak excellent English (reputation, not necessarily fact) and this coupled with the variegated linguistic situation seems to make it not seem worth it. I think Hindi would do better if people were more insistent on the prestige of its literary/poetic culture. But I've typed too much again. 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| napoleon Tetraglot Senior Member India Joined 4828 days ago 543 posts - 874 votes Speaks: Bengali*, English, Hindi, Urdu Studies: French, Arabic (Written) | Message 191 of 197 06 March 2014 at 4:34pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
Touché! :-) LOL @Jeffers: This exchange has been terribly stimulating. We went from the politics of languages in India to bilingulism in Indian schools. We discussed the Sanskrit situation and finally got to communalism. If I don't stop now, I'll never get any work done. :-) 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
 emk Diglot Moderator United States Joined 5344 days ago 2615 posts - 8806 votes Speaks: English*, FrenchB2 Studies: Spanish, Ancient Egyptian Personal Language Map | Message 192 of 197 06 March 2014 at 4:45pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
…
OK, folks, what's up with the politics? Please keep in mind the house rules:
In practice, individual moderators will sometimes allow a tiny amount of wiggle room for language politics, but only if: 1. The discussion is genuinely interesting from a language-learning perspective. 2. Everybody remains scrupulously polite, and doesn't just start making sarcastic remarks. In other words, you can talk about the politics, politely, insofar as they have something to do with language learning—but if you feel compelled to argue the politics, please reconsider. If you want to engage in partisan political arguments, you can visit 98% of the comment sections on the web. At HTLAL, we try to avoid every thread degenerating into politics. I'm going to leave this thread open for now, but please dial the politics way back. Thank you. Edited by emk on 06 March 2014 at 4:48pm 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
